[754] Cough

I don't think there is an amount of “civilizing” that I could go through that would ever erase my underlying need to lose my shit.

I guess that's a topic to start with.

I like obstruction. I like absurdity. I like random. I want whatever you expect to be something of a left turn and force you to sit on the kind of precarious edge that I do with regard to my expectations. I'm well aware the world absolutely can and does operate in predictable ways for years if not lifetimes for some people. I want to be prepared for shit to pop off any moment.

I told my friend not too long ago that with every passing day, I'm not just an atheist, but I believe in a god less and less. Each moment seems to insist on the absolute absurdity of existence in and of itself, and the relative freedom I have to respond to it as I please doesn't for a second endear me to some supernatural being grading my behavior on some ethereal scale.

This seems like the point.

Think about it. I work in a field where I get to hear daily about how family members fuck about with their children. God doesn't chime in on their paperwork. They know, like you know, somewhere in the back of your head there's a reminder that God isn't watching and you're probably going to get away with it. That's, of course, the conversation I'm interested in. What happens and why do you make the decision otherwise when there are no rules? That's my, and seemingly every other atheist's reality, so why not society at large? I don't need eternal damnation to prevent me from touching up a child, nor do I ignore that for the vast majority of human history we were perfectly fine with marrying off adolescents like a business transaction. How do you think that history should go forward but with honest conversation exposing details that feel “icky?”

Maybe I just feel old. I don't want to do obscene “stand out” things, but I'm hard-pressed to pretend my nature isn't contrarian. Something or another of my identity is involved in “the shit” and poor good story but bad otherwise decision making. But god forbid I force it. Obscene for obscenity's sake looks bad at any age. Even as I adopt the pace and tone of my domesticators, I can't help but believe in my capacity to burn it all down on a whim. I need to know that, worry about that, and believe that about myself. I'm never along for the ride.

Even tonight, I'm not as drunk as I thought I “should” be. I'm not as belligerent and angry in some incoherent blog as I thought I was gearing up for. I'm just annoyed I have the hiccups and have run out of anti-inflammatories that are going to speak to my budding headache in the morning. I'm not excited or amped up. I didn't have a conversation worth telling you about. I'm not even in some “escape” from the drudgery of my “training” for the new job. I'm probably as arbitrary a variable as I was a sixth grader in February. I have no memories of that time, and you have no reason to regard me now for the same reasons.

I started writing though because I still maintain an indignant posture. I'm not the one to be surprised by some cliché mid-life crisis. I don't cry over friends I simply haven't bothered to call but we arguably would have nothing to say to each other for months or years at a time anyway. I think it's just that I'm too smart and I figured it all out a long time ago. You have to be all about it right now. You have to be honest. You have to insist and try and sacrifice and get it all for the memories and moments as they come, because it's all right now, and it's all over as soon as it comes. I'm here, where I always am, right now, floating through memories and trying to be more let down by the bar scene than I even care to invest, perpetually looking for what I've already had in abundance. If you don't recognize and retain, it only gets worse.

[xx-14] Understand Myself

I paid for these results from Jordan Peterson's Understand Myself Profile. Worth it. Understand Myself


Agreeableness: Exceptionally Low


You are exceptionally low in agreeableness, which is the primary dimension of Interpersonal interaction in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Agreeableness has two aspects: compassion and politeness, which will be explained separately. Agreeableness is a very complex trait, with marked positive and negative elements all along its distribution. Because of this, higher scores and lower scores need to be explained at the same time.


People high in agreeableness are nice: compliant, nurturing, kind, naively trusting and conciliatory. However, because of their tendency to avoid conflict, they often dissemble and hide what they think. People low in agreeableness are not so nice: stubborn, dominant, harsh, skeptical, competitive and, in the extreme, even predatory. However, they tend to be straightforward, even blunt, so you know where they stand.


Your score puts you at the 3rd percentile for agreeableness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less agreeable than 96 of them and more agreeable than 3 of them.
Agreeableness
3rd percentile

You are less agreeable than 96 of 100 people


People with exceptionally low levels of agreeableness are seen by others as markedly competitive, colder, tougher and very much less empathic. They do not easily see the best in others, and are not particularly tolerant (an attitude that is much valued by agreeable people). They are very much less concerned about the emotional state of others, are uncommonly willing to engage in conflict, and will happily sacrifice peace and harmony to make a point or (if conscientious) to get things done. People may find them painfully straightforward and blunt. They tend very strongly towards dominance, rather than submission (particularly if also below average in neuroticism).


People with exceptionally low levels of agreeableness do not at all easily forgive. They are definitely not accepting, flexible, gentle or patient. They feel minimal pity for those who are excluded, punished or defeated, and attribute such problems to weakness or inability. They are also extremely unlikely to be taken advantage of by disagreeable, manipulative or otherwise troublesome people, or those with criminal or predatory intent. Their extraordinarily high levels of skepticism play a protective role, although it often interferes with their ability to cooperate with or trust others whose intentions are genuinely good. They are also much less likely to reward good behavior or to give credit where it is due. They cooperate grudgingly, and only when cooperation is in their clear self-interest, preferring competition, with its well-defined losers and winners. They do not lose arguments (or avoid discussions) with anyone, for any reason, and enjoy the battle. This can interfere with their ability to learn from experience (their own or others’). They are very likely to be expert at bargaining for themselves, and at negotiating for more recognition or power, and are likely to have higher salaries and to earn more money, in consequence. People exceptionally low in agreeableness are therefore less likely to suffer from resentment or to harbour invisible anger. They let you know exactly what they think, when they think it, whether you want to know it or not. In addition, because of their tendency to engage in conflict, at a moment’s notice, people exceptionally low in agreeableness do not sacrifice medium- to long-term stability and functionality for the sake of short-term peace. This means that problems that should be solved in the present are often solved, quickly and harshly. This means that such problems may not accumulate counterproductively across time. The price paid for this? People close to those exceptionally low in agreeableness will frequently experience them as overbearing and uncaring.


Women are higher in agreeableness than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 61.5. For men it is 38.5. The fact that men are lower in agreeableness than women helps explain their much higher rates of criminal incarceration (90% male). The primary difference between criminals and non-criminals is disagreeableness. If the typical criminal is more disagreeable than 98% of people in the general population, then almost all those criminals will be male. This difference in agreeableness between men and women is largest in countries such as Norway and Sweden, where the most has been done to ensure equality of outcome between the sexes. This provides strong evidence that biological factors rather than environment and learning account for the dissimilarity.


Agreeableness, per se, is not strongly associated with political liberalism or conservatism, but this is because the aspects of agreeableness predict such political belief in opposite ways, and cancel each other out. Liberals are higher in aspect compassion, and conservatives in aspect politeness. However, alliance with the category of belief that has come to be known as politically correct is strongly predicted by agreeableness (particularly compassion). What this appears to mean is that agreeable people strongly identify with those they deem oppressed, seeing them, essentially, as exploited infants, and demonize those they see as oppressors, seeing them as cruel, heartless predators.


There are large differences between men and women in terms of spontaneous interest, and these also appear associated with agreeableness. Agreeable people, caring as they do for others, are more likely to enter professions associated with people, such as teaching and nursing, which are dominated by women. This is true even in the Scandinavian countries, where attempts to produce gender-equal societies has reached a maximum. Disagreeable people, by contrast, appear to prefer systematizing over empathizing, and are more interested in things – machines and technology. In consequence, professions such as engineering and trades associated with construction and machinery tend to be dominated by relatively disagreeable men.


Agreeableness has two aspects: compassion and politeness.



Compassion: Low


You are low in compassion, which is one aspect of Agreeableness. Your score puts you at the 13th percentile for compassion. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less compassionate than 86 of them and more compassionate than 13 of them.


Much less compassionate people are not primarily oriented towards the problems of other people or other living things. They are less swayed by cuteness. They are willing to make other people experience negative emotion by engaging in conflict and competition. They like to win, and will engage in confrontation to do so. They are substantially less concerned about helping other people. They make sure their own needs and interests are attended to, and are less willing to sacrifice for the sake of other people. This can make them harsh and unsympathetic. People might turn to them for the cold, hard truth, but not for a soft, patient, eternally-listening ear. They are less empathetic and caring. However, because they are not primarily other-oriented, they can often negotiate very effectively on their own behalf, and are likely to get at least what they deserve (for their hard work, for example). In consequence, they are unlikely to harbor feelings of resentment or hidden anger.
Compassion
13th percentile

You are less compassionate than 86 of 100 people


Those who are liberal, politically, score somewhat higher in compassion than conservatives.


Women are also higher in compassion than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 61. For men it is 39.



Politeness: Exceptionally Low


You are exceptionally low in politeness, which is one aspect of Agreeableness. Your score puts you at the 2nd percentile for politeness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be less polite than 97 of them and more polite than 2 of them.


People who are exceptionally low in politeness challenge and confront authority – and they are not obedient. If they are respectful, it is grudgingly, and will only be manifested toward people who continually both deserve and demand it. They are comfortable confronting other people, and enjoy it. People extremely low in politeness are motivated to engage in conflict, and to seek out confrontation. They may have a strong tendency toward conduct-disordered, antisocial, delinquent, even criminal behavior, particularly if male and adolescent. They may find themselves very frequently in trouble with authority, in consequence. Their skepticism can make it extremely difficult for them to find a place in the middle or lower in hierarchies of power and dominance. They are hyper-dominant, rather than submissive (particularly if they are also low in neuroticism).
Politeness
2nd percentile

You are less polite than 97 of 100 people


Those who are liberal, politically, score somewhat lower in politeness than conservatives (the opposite pattern is seen with compassion).


Women are higher in politeness than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 59. For men it is 41.



Conscientiousness: Moderately High


You are moderately high in conscientiousness, which is the primary dimension of dutiful achievement in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Conscientiousness is a measure of obligation, attention to detail, hard work, persistence, cleanliness, efficiency and adherence to rules, standards and processes. Conscientious people implement their plans and establish and maintain order.


Your score puts you at the 63rd percentile for conscientiousness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more conscientious than 63 of them and less conscientious than 36 of them.


Moderately conscientious people are dutiful. They tend to slog away at a task until finished. They work reasonably hard and do not want to waste time. They are less likely than average to procrastinate (particularly if they are also low in neuroticism). If a moderately conscientious person promises to do something, they will do it, and rarely be delayed. They tend to be relatively decisive, neat, organized, future-oriented, and reliable. They are not too-frequently distracted.
Conscientiousness
63rd percentile

You are more conscientious than 63 of 100 people


Moderately conscientious people are more likely than average to obtain higher grades in academic settings (particularly if they are also intelligent), and to make competent administrators and managers. They like to have everything in its proper place, but are not particularly obsessed with detail. They tend to do things by the book. Moderately conscientious people are somewhat prone to guilt (although they organize their lives so that they have comparatively little to feel guilty about). They are also more sensitive than average to shame, self-disgust and self-contempt.


Individuals who are moderately conscientious react comparatively poorly to failure (particularly if they are above average in neuroticism). They tend to be judgemental and can be disgusted by their own moral transgressions, as well as those of others. They suffer higher than normal levels of shame and guilt when unemployed or otherwise unoccupied, even when that occurs through no fault of their own. Moderately conscientious people are committed to the idea of personal responsibility. They believe that hard work and diligence will and should be rewarded, and tend to think that those who don’t succeed deserve their failure. They value hygiene, moral purity and achievement. Now and then they might micro-manage and exert too much control.


Moderately conscientious people are slightly more likely to be political conservatives, rather than liberal (particularly if they are also below average in openness).


Women are very slightly more conscientious than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 51.5. For men it is 49.5.


Conscientiousness has two aspects: industriousness and orderliness.



Industriousness: Moderately High


You are moderately high in industriousness, which is one aspect of conscientiousness. Your score puts you at the 67th percentile for industriousness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more industrious than 67 of them and less industrious than 32 of them.


Moderately industrious people are reasonably likely to be successful in school and in administrative and managerial positions (particularly if they are intelligent). They don't live to work, however, and do not always have to be doing something useful. They are generally quite dutiful, however, and tend not to put things off or mess them up. They also tend to finish what they start, pretty much on schedule. Moderately industrious people have some genuine interest in considering how to to accomplish more in less time, with fewer resources, and can focus consistently on the task at hand.
Industriousness
67th percentile

You are more industrious than 67 of 100 people


Moderately industrious people are quite likely to judge shirkers or people who are incompetent in a negative manner. They tend to believe that people fail because they don't apply themselves, or work hard enough. They are definitely capable of feeling a sense of personal failure and guilt if they do not live up to their duties. However, because they usually stay on schedule and accept responsibility, they generally avoid experience actual guilt.


Those who are liberal and those who are conservatives appear equally industrious.


Men are slightly more industrious than women. The mean percentile for men in a general population (women and men) is 51.5. For women it is 49.5.



Orderliness: Typical or Average


You are average or typical in orderliness, which is one aspect of conscientiousness. Your score puts you at the 54th percentile for orderliness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more orderly than 54 of them and less orderly than 45 of them.


Typically orderly people are neither particularly disturbed nor disgusted by mess and chaos. They keep everything moderately tidy and organized. They don’t think in terms of simple black and white; in their world, there are many shades of grey. They don’t rely overmuch on schedules, lists or routines, preferring to take things as they come. They are not overly oriented toward detail, rigidly rule-abiding or judgemental.
Orderliness
54th percentile

You are more orderly than 54 of 100 people


They like routine and predictability, under some circumstances, but don’t mind if such things are disrupted. They can manage complex, sensitive processes when supervised properly and carefully, but may have to be reminded to pay proper attention and maintain focus. They can, however, tolerate the mess, disruption and intervening periods of chaos that may accompany creative endeavor.


Those who are average in orderliness are no more likely to be political conservatives or liberals, although they will tend toward the former, if low in openness to experience and the latter if high.


Women are more orderly than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 54.5. For men it is 45.5. This may account for some of the trouble in relation to housework between women and men. Since women are, on average, more orderly, household disorder will trigger disgust and discomfort in them faster. This may happen with sufficient frequency so they end up doing a disproportionate share of such work (even though if they waited a bit longer their less orderly partners, often men, might end up equally troubled and motivated to fix the problem). Orderly people are more likely to have items such as event calendars, drawer organizers, laundry baskets, irons and ironing boards in their immediate environments.



Extraversion: High


You are high in extraversion, which is the primary dimension of positive emotion in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Extraversion is a measure of general sensitivity to positive emotions such as hope, joy, anticipation and approach, particularly in social situations.


Your score puts you at the 77th percentile for extraversion. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more extraverted than 77 of them and less extraverted than 22 of them.


People with high levels of extraversion are comparatively enthusiastic, talkative, assertive in social situations, and gregarious. They are typically energized by social contact, and crave it. They take great pleasure in planning parties, telling jokes, making people laugh, and taking part in community activities. They are likely to have positive memories of the past, high levels of current self-esteem (particularly if they are low in neuroticism), and to feel positive and optimistic about the future.
Extraversion
77th percentile

You are more extraverted than 77 of 100 people


People who are highly extraverted have a difficult time keeping things to themselves, and tend to tell everyone everything. They are self-disclosing (particularly if also high in neuroticism) and they warm up quickly to other people. They tend to speak first and most often in meetings. They can be captivating and convincing. They will often be the first to act.


People who are high in extraversion make enthusiastic employees, and are well-suited to jobs involving sales, persuasion, work in groups and public speaking (particularly, once again, if they are low in neuroticism). They are not as suited to occupations that require a lot of isolated work (such as computer programming or accounting).


People high in extraversion can also be impulsive, particularly when it comes to having fun in social situations. They are more likely than average to sacrifice the future to the present, when something social or group-oriented beckons. It is somewhat difficult for them to be alone and to study and work. They can be easily distracted by opportunities to chat, joke and socialize. This is particularly the case if they are also low in conscientiousness. When individuals are extraverted and conscientious, they are more productive than if they are introverted and conscientious. However, when they are introverted and unconscientious, they are more productive than they are when they are extroverted and unconscientious.


People high in extraversion are more dominant in social situations, particularly if they are also low in agreeableness. Less agreeable extraverts tend to be self-centered – something that can be made worse if they are also low in conscientiousness.


Those who are politically liberal are slightly less extraverted than conservatives.


Women are slightly more extraverted than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 52. For men it is 48.


Extraversion has two aspects: Enthusiasm and Assertiveness.



Enthusiasm: Typical or Average


You are typical or average in enthusiasm, which is one aspect of extraversion. Your score puts you at the 47th percentile for enthusiasm. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more enthusiastic than 47 of them and less enthusiastic than 52 of them.


Individuals who are average in enthusiasm have their excitable moments, are sometimes happy, and are reasonably easy to get to know, but they are essentially moderate in their positive emotion. They will talk about things or people they find particularly interesting, but tend to keep more quiet, otherwise. They laugh and joke, but not excessively. They don’t crave the spotlight. They enjoy parties, in moderation, and generally like to be around people, but they can spend time alone. They don’t warm up immediately to others, particularly in groups, and they can keep their own affairs private. They like excitement, but only in moderate doses. They are moderately positive about the past and future.
Enthusiasm
47th percentile

You are more enthusiastic than 47 of 100 people


Enthusiasm is not strongly associated with political preference, either conservative or liberal.


Women are higher in enthusiasm than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 55. For men it is 45.



Assertiveness: Very High


You are very high in assertiveness, which is one aspect of extraversion. Your score puts you at the 90th percentile for assertiveness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more assertive than 90 of them and less assertive than 9 of them.


Very assertive people are “take charge” types. They put their own opinions forward uncommonly strongly, and tend to dominate and control social situations. Very assertive people can be strikingly influential and captivating. They have the communication style that is often associated with leadership. This is good when they are knowledgeable, competent and able, but not so good when they aren’t. Assertive people are people of action. They don’t wait for others to lead the way, but leap in, heedlessly. They can be impulsive, in consequence, and can act without thinking.
Assertiveness
90th percentile

You are more assertive than 90 of 100 people


Liberals tend to be slightly less assertive than conservatives.


Women are slightly less assertive than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 48. For men it is 52.



Neuroticism: Moderately Low


You are moderately low in neuroticism, which is the primary dimension of negative emotion in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Neuroticism is a measure of general sensitivity to negative emotions such as pain, sadness, irritable or defensive anger, fear and anxiety.


Your score puts you at the 31st percentile for neuroticism. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be lower in neuroticism than 68 of them and higher in neuroticism than 31 of them.


People with moderately low levels of neuroticism tend not to focus on the negative elements, anxieties and uncertainties of the past, present and future. They can have periods of time where they are unhappy, anxious and irritable, particularly when facing a serious, sustained problem, but they generally cope well, don’t worry too much, and recover comparatively quickly when stressed. They’re pretty good at keeping their head in a storm, and they tend not to mountains out of molehills.
Neuroticism
31st percentile

You are lower in neuroticism than 68 of 100 people


They tend to have higher than average levels of self-esteem, particularly when they are also average or above average in extraversion. They are at relatively low risk for developing anxiety disorders and depression (again, particularly if average or above in extraversion).


When good things happen to them, people with moderately low levels of neuroticism can accept it, without wondering if they deserved it. They generally tend to be satisfied with their relationships and careers. Overall, they are quite tolerant of stress, and can accept failure and setbacks as part of life. Moderately low levels of neuroticism are associated with less concern about mental and physical health, fewer physician and emergency room visits, and a lower than average degree of absenteeism at work and at school (unless accompanied by very low levels of conscientiousness).


People with moderately low levels of neuroticism can handle risk better without becoming unduly concerned. They are less concerned with security, and can handle recreational, career, financial and social situations where the possibility of loss is higher. This makes it easier for them to consider as well as implement career changes and other transformations that could enhance their lives.


Neuroticism is not a powerful predictor of political belief, either conservative or liberal.


Females tend to be higher in neuroticism than males. The typical woman is higher in neuroticism than 60% of the general population of men and women combined. In part, this may be why women report more unhappiness in their relationships, at work, in school and with their health than men, on average, and why women initiate 70% of all divorces. This difference in neuroticism between men and women appears to emerge at puberty. It is largest in countries such as Norway and Sweden, where the most has been done to ensure equality of outcome between the sexes. This provides strong evidence that biological factors rather than environment and learning account for the dissimilarity.


Trait neuroticism is made up of the aspects withdrawal and volatility.



Withdrawal: Low


You are low in withdrawal, which is one aspect of neuroticism. Your score puts you at the 19th percentile for withdrawal. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be lower in withdrawal than 80 of them and higher in withdrawal than 19 of them.


Individuals low in withdrawal rarely suffer from or are impeded by anticipatory anxiety. They can handle new, uncertain, unexpected, threatening or complex situations well. They are substantially less likely to avoid or withdraw in the face of the unknown and unexpected.


People with low levels of withdrawal tend not to feel sad, lonesome, disappointed and grief-stricken – and, if they do, not deeply nor for long. They experience much lower than normal levels of doubt and worry, embarrassment, self-consciousness and discouragement in the face of threat and punishment. They are quite resistant to and rarely worried about social rejection, and rarely feel hurt or threatened. Even when actually hurt, frightened, or anxious, they recover easily and quickly. People with low levels of withdrawal are not worriers. Technically, withdrawal has been associated with activity in the brain systems that regulate passive avoidance.
Withdrawal
19th percentile

You are lower in withdrawal than 80 of 100 people


Those who are liberal, politically, are slightly higher in withdrawal than conservatives.


Women are higher in withdrawal than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 60. For men it is 40.



Volatility: Typical or Average


You are typical or average in volatility, which is one aspect of neuroticism. Your puts you at the 48th percentile for volatility. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be more volatile than 48 of them and less volatile than 51 of them.


Individuals average in volatility tend to not to vary abnormally in their mood. They are not particularly irritable, and feel no more than typical levels of disappointment, frustration, pain and social isolation. They express their frustration, disappointment and irritability reasonably and not excessively often. Even when stirred up and upset or angry or irritated, they calm down relatively quickly. They are no more argumentative than average and infrequently lose their composure.


If provoked in a dispute, a person of average volatility may react in kind (particularly if also low in agreeableness). However, such people generally remain calm and unperturbed, even when stressed. Volatile people tend to get upset if something bad does happen, while people high in withdrawal (the other aspect of neuroticism) tend to be concerned that something bad might happen. Technically, volatility has been associated with activity in the brain systems that regulate fight, flight or freeze.
Volatility
48th percentile

You are more volatile than 48 of 100 people


Volatility is not strongly related to political preference, either liberal or conservative.


Women are higher in volatility than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 57.5. For men it is 42.5.



Openness to Experience: Moderately High


You are moderately high in openness to experience, which is the primary dimension of creativity, artistic interest and intelligence (particularly verbal intelligence) in the Big Five personality trait scientific model. Openness to experience is a measure of interest in novelty, art, literature, abstract thinking, philosophy as well as sensitivity to aesthetic emotions and beauty.


Your score puts you at the 68th percentile for openness to experience. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be higher in openness to experience than 68 of them and lower in openness to experience than 31 of them.


People with moderately high levels of openness to experience are somewhat more likely than average to be characterized by others as smart, creative, exploratory, intelligent and visionary. They tend to be more interested in learning and in acquiring new abilities and skills. They are curious and exploratory. They find themselves interested in abstract thinking, philosophy, and the meaning of belief systems and ideologies. They attend cultural events such as movies, concerts, dance recitals, plays, poetry readings, gallery openings and art shows. They are likely to enjoy writing. They enjoy complex, abstract ideas more than the average person, and like to confront and solve problems.
Openness to Experience
68th percentile

You are higher in openness to experience than 68 of 100 people


They are likely to be readers, with a wider range of interests. They have a broader and deeper vocabulary. They can think and learn quite quickly. They are comparatively proficient at formulating new ideas, and tend to be articulate (particularly if average or above in extraversion). People moderately high in openness can sometimes see old things in new ways. They can formulate problems in a diverse range of ways, and can typically generate a reasonable number of problem-solving solutions. They enjoy change, often to make things better, but also just for the sake of change.


People who are moderately high in openness to experience are somewhat less well adapted to situations or occupations that are routinized and predictable. They have some trouble fitting in at the bottom of hierarchies. They are less suited to entry-level, repetitive, rote positions, because they often think up new ways to do things, and such ideas are seldom welcome from someone at the bottom. They are creative thinkers. They tend to shake things up a bit, particularly if they are also disagreeable and assertive, and may be attracted to more revolutionary ideas (particularly if below average in conscientiousness).


Individuals moderately high in openness to experience tend to be entrepreneurial in spirit, as well as smarter and more creative. They have more than average interest in creating new ventures, sometimes for profit, sometimes for curiosity, and sometimes for personal transformation. At least moderately high levels of openness to experience appear necessary to the formation and leadership of business and other forms of complex organization, although conscientiousness appears required for the attention to detail and process management that such organizations also always need.


People moderately high in openness to experience tend to be interested in many things. However, they can still typically settle on a single path in life, to specialize to a necessary degree, and to create an integrated identity (unless they are very high or above in neuroticism and/or very low or below in conscientiousness). People characterized by the combination of moderately high openness to experience and very high or above levels of neuroticism can undermine their own convictions and beliefs by questioning and making themselves lost and anxious. Open, unconscientious people tend to be “under-achievers” (particularly if also above average in neuroticism). Such people appear to have the capability to succeed, can learn quickly, and are creative, but they can have some trouble implementing their ideas.


Openness to experience is the dimension that best predicts political allegiance (with conscientiousness, particularly the aspect of orderliness, coming in at second place). Those who are liberal, politically, are very much more likely to be high in openness to experience than conservatives.


Women and men differ very little in openness to experience at the trait level, although there are differences in the aspect levels.


Trait openness to experience is made up of the aspects of intellect and openness.



Intellect: High


Note: Do not confuse the personality aspect of Intellect with IQ. Intellect is a measure of interest in abstract ideas, essentially, while IQ is a measure of processing speed, verbal ability, working memory, and problem solving capacity, and is better measured with a formal IQ test. It is perfectly possible to have a high IQ and a low score on the personality trait of Intellect (or the reverse).


You are high in intellect, which is one aspect of openness to experience. Your score puts you at the 86th percentile for intellect. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be higher in intellect than 86 of them and lower in intellect than 13 of them.


People high in intellect are quite interested in ideas and abstract concepts. They enjoy being confronted with novel information, even when it is complex. They are substantially more curious and exploratory than average, and frequently like to tackle and solve problems. They will actively engage in and seek out and initiate issue-oriented discussions, and are likely to read, think about and want to discuss idea-centered books (most frequently non-fiction). They are generally articulate and can formulate ideas clearly and quickly (particularly if average or higher in extraversion). They have a wide vocabulary, and actively enjoy learning new things. People high in intellect will often find and generate novel, creative concepts and voluntarily search for and adapt well to new experience and situations.
Intellect
86th percentile

You are higher in intellect than 86 of 100 people


People high in intellect find complex, rapidly changing occupations to their liking and will generally do well at them (particularly if they are also high in conscientiousness and low in neuroticism). However, they are substantially less well-suited to stable, straightforward and more traditional occupations, where the rules don't change, and will experience frequent periods of boredom and frustration in such positions.


Liberals are higher in intellect than conservatives (although the biggest difference between the two is openness to experience at the trait level).


Women are lower than men in intellect (although not in IQ). This is probably a difference in interest: people high in intellect, compared to openness, are more likely to prefer the sciences to the arts. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 45. For men it is 55.



Openness: Moderately Low


You are moderately low in openness, which is one aspect of openness to experience. Your score puts you at the 38th percentile for openness. If you were one of 100 people in a room, you would be lower in openness than 61 of them and higher in openness than 38 of them.


The closest synonym for openness (rather than openness to experience, which encompasses openness and intellect) is creativity. People moderately low in openness or creativity do not find beauty particularly important. They tend not to require an outlet for their creative ability, and will certainly not wither away without it. They don’t particularly appreciate art or beautiful crafts, and are less sensitive to color and architectural form. They are not typically collectors, and very rarely pursue it passionately. They are less imaginative, more rarely daydream and reflect less often than average. If they enjoy music or other art forms, their taste tends toward the conventional and popular. They are less often musical or artistic themselves (both of these are rare in the general population). They do not generally become immersed in a book, or a movie, or in their own thoughts.
Openness
38th percentile

You are lower in openness than 61 of 100 people


People of moderately low openness tend to be quite stable and conventional (particularly if they are also average or above in conscientiousness). At least moderate levels of openness tend to be necessary for entrepreneurial success, and prove comparatively useful at the top of hierarchies, even in very conservative occupations such as banking, accounting and law, which need creative people in leadership positions to provide new vision and direction.


Liberals are higher in openness than conservatives (although the biggest difference between the two is openness to experience, at the trait level).


Women are higher in openness than men. The mean percentile for women in a general population (women and men) is 56.5. For men it is 44.5.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Personality Lab

Big Five Score (0-100)	Facet Scores (0-100)	Personality Description
Extraversion 73	Sociability 69 Assertiveness 94 Energy Level 56	Extraversion High scorers tend to be talkative and energetic. They like being around people, and are comfortable asserting themselves in a group. High scorers tend to have more friends and dating partners, and are seen as more popular. They generally prefer, and are successful in, social and enterprising occupations. They are more likely to serve in community leadership roles, and to do volunteer work. They tend to prefer energetic music such as hip-hop, rock, and heavy metal, exercise more frequently, and are more likely to play a sport. They experience more frequent positive emotions, and react more strongly to positive events. Women tend to score higher than men. Low scorers tend to be socially and emotionally reserved. They generally prefer to be alone or with a few close friends, and keep their opinions and feelings to themselves. Low scorers tend to pursue, and do better in, jobs that involve independent work rather than social interaction. They are less likely to engage in thrill-seeking or risky behaviors, such as smoking, alcohol consumption, and risky sexual activity.
Agreeableness 27	Compassion 31 Respectfulness 31 Trust 19	Agreeableness High scorers tend to be considerate and polite in social interactions, and enjoy cooperating. They find it easy to trust people, and feel compassion for those in need. High scorers tend to be well liked by their peers, and establish satisfying and stable close relationships. They generally prefer, and do better in, social occupations. They are more likely to be religious, to serve in community leadership roles, and to do volunteer work. They tend to prefer pop, country, and religious music. Women tend to score higher than men, and older adults tend to score higher than younger adults. Low scorers express themselves directly and bluntly, even at the risk of starting an argument. They enjoy competition, and tend to be skeptical of other people's intentions. Low scorers tend to earn higher salaries, and are more likely to engage in some risky behaviors, such as smoking and aggressive driving.
Conscientiousness 77	Organization 88 Productiveness 81 Responsibility 62	Conscientiousness High scorers tend to be organized and responsible. They work hard to achieve their goals, and see tasks through to completion. High scorers tend to earn higher grades in school, and perform better in many occupations. They are more likely to be religious and hold conservative political attitudes. They tend to exercise more, have better physical health, and live longer. Women tend to score higher than men, and older adults tend to score higher than younger adults. Low scorers tend to act spontaneously rather than making plans, and find it easier to look at the big picture than pay attention to details. They prefer to jump between tasks, instead of finishing one at a time. Low scorers are more likely to hold liberal political attitudes. They tend to engage in more risky behaviors, such as smoking, alcohol consumption, drug use, and risky sexual activity.
Negative Emotionality 35	Anxiety 62 Depression 19 Emotional Volatility 25	Negative Emotionality High scorers tend to be emotionally sensitive, and have up-and-down mood swings. They experience more frequent negative emotions, and react more strongly to negative events. Women tend to score higher than men, and younger adults tend to score higher than older adults. Low scorers tend to be emotionally stable and resilient. They usually stay calm, even in stressful situations, and can quickly bounce back from negative events. Low scorers tend to feel a greater sense of well-being.
Open-Mindedness 79	Intellectual Curiosity 100 Aesthetic Sensitivity 62 Creative Imagination 75	Open-Mindedness High scorers are generally open to new activities and new ideas. They tend to be creative, intellectually curious, and sensitive to art and beauty. High scorers tend to prefer, and do better in, scientific and artistic occupations. They are more likely to hold liberal political attitudes, prefer classical, jazz, blues, and rock music, and engage in drug use. Low scorers tend to be traditional, down-to-earth, and stick with tried-and-true ways of doing things. They prefer the familiar over the new, and the concrete over the abstract. Low scorers tend to prefer, and do better in, conventional and practical occupations. They are more likely to hold conservative political attitudes.

[584] Say Anything Else

I suppose one of the things I find more frustrating about persistent intellectual posture is how easy it is to ignore where and how it creates cramps. I can bend and balance boxes of 2-liters for hours and inevitably will start to feel a little knot form or a wave of pain. You sit down all day and need to lift your arms above your head and roll your neck or swivel side to side. An intellectual posture allows you to say the same thing over and over again, and instead of setting off a warning sign that there's a need to stretch or get a massage, the neural pathways you've created to work yourself into that position get reinforced each time you assert it or you hear that someone agrees with it.

As infinitely complex and confused perceptual beings, we're blind to the “true” nature of reality. I don't believe we will ever find the words, run the experiment, or dig up “42” in an act of cosmic comedic justice. This isn't what we want though. We want the explanatory power that infects and translates or gives us the groundwork from which to build. The more you understand about quantum systems, the cooler the devices you get to take pictures of your dick with. Find the evolutionary ingrained model for social being or mental pathologies, turn your abusive parents into categorically immature and unintelligent narcissists with oedipal complexes and mood disorders; the more adjectives, the easier to swallow and maybe cope with or develop a strategy for combating.

We want the story because whether we're particularly adept at articulating it or not, we want the story to mean something. We want it to reflect our values, what we've worked or sacrificed for, perhaps what many members of our tribe have died for. The problem being, there's no end to the amount of things any one person may find valuable or ways in which they'll choose to try and approach them. So you get extremely specific scientific disciplines arguing so minutely that maybe 3 or 4 people in the entire world even have a shot of knowing what the hell they're talking about, let alone be able to discern the truth of either one. The other side of the spectrum gets you an endless ethics debate regarding the relative imperative to behave in accordance with the tenants of the really peaceful religion.

Here I'll note a reason I approach writing the way I do. There's a very specific and infrequent utility I get from truly picking out the individual lice of insight on the infected head of some topic I'm exploring. 99 times out of 100, absolutely no one wants or cares to read the book I read, or the Jacobin article giving you the ten page history of why your modern union sucks ass, or the Guardians of the Galaxy comics so you can appreciate how disappointing I felt the first movie really was. They want an impression of my approach to whatever it is that concerns them. They either want someone to mirror and add, or swallow. 1 in 100 want to genuinely talk or debate and perhaps learn something new. It is true that I find details interesting and vitally important depending on your task. Details aren't going to give you an impression of “me” and my process, they're going to reduce me to a pedantic research paper “wowing” you with my capacity for citations.

Another way to state the above paragraph is that there is no point to how I write but to try. It has set with me for a long time the psychopath (and I use that term technically) who attacked the very idea that I would even bother at all when so many better philosophers have said it before. It's like an archetypal ignorance. I couldn't possibly phrase intellectual and cultural suicide better. Every morality story you hear in church has been passed down from “already figured out” sentiments our ancestors learned from fighting the environment and each other. Every step forward, be it technologically or in terms of morality, builds on the breaking down and reiteration then reorientation of models and experiences that, say every 40 or so years, 1/3 of the population hasn't necessarily experienced. In 2 years, how many younger obliterated freshman during Little 5 are going to stop and remember to make a reference to 9/11?

It seems stories about tragedy, war, and mass death are turning into failures of retaining and translating the meat of why they happened meaningfully. 9/11 will get a commemorative stamp. Someone will put a statue up memorializing the Pulse nightclub victims, naively inspired by a little girl staring down a bull as a statement regarding intrinsic value or consequence. What to do with the details, when they matter so so much but are often so many and so complicated they get lost to the lazy symbolism or furiously debated into pieces so small you can't really pick them up anymore?

I think you have to learn how to orient yourself in relation to those details. You have to get a higher consciousness perhaps about the nature of what it means to hold something as a distinguishable entity. Say at the level of the neurochemistry of your brain, it can't differentiate between the positive rush from coffee verses cocaine verses the best sex of your life. But you're not just your brain, at least, you don't act like it, so you impose a value and relative utility in how you choose to get the channels flowing. You can look for the hidden orientations of your mind with digressions like these. You can surprise yourself by stumbling forward into manifest value.

It's something of a confusing and seemingly perfectly arbitrary process. Why write...just anything? Whether I want it to or not, my brain is working. It's taking my experiences and matching them against my expectations of the world and of myself. And it's doing it with more (possible) neural connections than there are atoms in the universe. That I could distill a single sentence is a miracle. That I might give you an impression or insight by peeking so far into my mind I'm actually in yours is an act of God.

And you don't like that. Not one bit. And you don't like that because to take on the burden of what it means to be God is infinitely taxing. It's an obliteration event. You can't be “you” if you're God, as it's understood in modern terms. What an act of ignorant pride! You don't know everything! You are not everywhere! You are not the underlying Truth of MY morality! So you learn pretty quickly how intellectually deficient an ideologue is as they summarily dismiss you and often condescend to pray.

The issue being, you are God too, incidentally, the angry destructive one that no one seems to understand but keep sacrificing for. Surely one needn't know everything to know a significant amount about that which they are and how it tends to behave. Not a single person on the road deemed it practical or necessary to drive on the wrong side and cause an accident today. In all of my Godly wisdom, without ever saying it out loud, I predicted as much and it came true! How does one know the future if not by divine right? As to the morality of not running your car into others deliberately, how'd you learn not to do that except by the normalizing factors of your culture? Of course I'm your truth, because you haven't killed me off despite the murderous intent I can see in your eyes. A murderous intent that happens everywhere and in everything where Gods like me attack lesser Gods like you in manners like this.

We don't say our goals out loud, so we're constantly disagreeing about, literally, “nothing.” The goal of a “productive” conversation is to get the point of what the person is telling you and see if it has anything to do with how to better orient yourself later. When you get into an argument, and you assume it's about “winning,” it seems more a misfiring of your threat systems. Your goal isn't to escalate until you get a divorce or kill the other person to defend your opinion. Your goal is to be understood or achieve some form of reciprocity, when all you've done is offered a baseless proposition floating in the might-as-well-be-empty head-space of your mind.

This comes out with the phrasing of things like, “I was only trying to help!” Help what? Help who? Help how? You have a very vague feeling and notion of what constitutes “help,” and by not parsing it out, you're throwing yourself in to drown along with the person you think is trapped under water.

So you can think about this when people, in my view, very ignorantly attack the idea that science can't speak to human values. They point to the tenuous assumptions in science that the observable universe is fundamentally capable of being understood to the point of absurdity. It doesn't matter if we get to “42,” it matters that it's irrelevant your opinion of clitoral castration, for example, it's an unnecessary harm inflicted on vulnerable women where it should be obvious there's a meaningful reason to eradicate the process objectively. Science, the study and approaching-more-accurate accounting of the material world in which we operate, can help dispel the empty-headed idea that vilified genitalia. (Empty insofar as to what we understand today as it is reasonable to conclude much of our ingrained attitudes and relationships are influenced by the complicated dangers regarding sex as we progressed.)

Of course we're all flailing about in the infinite waters of confusion and entropy. But more of course our very capacity for, not just perception, but motivated and reproducible perception means we need to adopt a mode of starting from a shared place and stating a goal AFTER we've done the work like this to bounce around the universe of our own mind to figure out just what it is we're even bothering to talk about, worry about, or set out to fix or achieve. There's a very large list as to why that doesn't happen, presumably the confusion or frustration you might feel trying to follow a blog like this and immediately concluding, indeed mylinating, the “no point” circuitry top amongst it.

I get very dismayed when I hear spot-on heavily tested and investigated stories for either my own behavior or something I've noticed in my family. If I were to try and “bring this home” as it were, without hesitation you can rob yourself of your identity, and therefore responsibility, by couching your understanding too convincingly in any paradigm that relies on your capacity to make an ill-informed “truth” claim. It doesn't matter the doting mother scared of being alone provokes her only son to overcompensate, and indeed run far away, in EXACTLY the manner as has happened between my second cousin and aunt. My degrees of openness and conscientious thoroughly predicted I'd be writing this thought digression after 17 hours of practically nonstop work. But that doesn't remove my responsibility for what it says or choice to write it. It's one blog, one piece, of all that is me, I have been, or am trying to be. Like every detail, it informs, but it's only the Truth to the degree in which you want to deify me, which you don't want to do. But how many other ideas from other deities are you doing that with right now? How many variations of other people's hells are you roasting in? And can you articulate why you chose them, if you chose them, and if there's a way out? That's the kind of story that's meaningful to me.

[347] Brittle Bones And Base Tones

I’d like to talk about fragility.

We’re builders. Whether it’s looking up at a sky scraper and getting chills or crying upon looking at a beautiful piece of art, there’s almost something spiritual in creating and then reflecting. I can’t say if there’s much a difference if you’re looking at your own work verses someone else’s, because it’s not just about pride. There’s an innate itch towards doing something that once scratched seems to fulfill everything.

As easily as we build, we destroy. I had to stop and kill a perfectly innocent bug in the middle of the last paragraph because I’m conditioned to feel uncomfortable by the amount of legs it has. I can’t even kill bugs without imagining an alien super race swinging an oversized telephone book at me. That organism was just as complex and lucky, well not so much lucky, to be alive as I am. In an instant and in fact every instant, some form of existence disappears.

Clearly, I seek to immortalize this bug. I should make its death mean something. Maybe I can use what happened to better explain how my thoughts on aliens don’t so much humble me as they do paralyze. Maybe I’ll be able to explain that’s what happens when you try to instantly evaluate everything you’ve created, everything you’ve invested in for your continued existence, and then poof it out of existence. It could help to explain that you can’t help it but to run such thought experiments. It could help relate your propensity to overstep or move quickly.

When a tornado rips through a neighborhood and leaves more than one house intact, no one’s following up with the lucky few who won’t do battle with an insurance company. The story is about the lost pet that was found under the rubble and returned home. Even with everything you own gone, the bond created between an owner and his pet makes it go down easier. Part of you always knew moving to “tornado alley” would beget something like this, but looking at your house in matchstick form is a different kind of loss. Even if all your neighbors’ pets are dead, and maybe they are too, there’s something we want to hear about, we want to believe in, which defies a, certainly impartial, wind storm.

I’ve certainly experienced the shock of something unexpected or completely new jamming up the works. It’s a rather haunting paralysis. You’d like to believe even in the worst of situations, it should be possible to “keep it together” or whatever that’s supposed to mean. But I think there’s a power in identifying and owning how easily you can be blown away. I think you step more carefully and maybe care more deeply.

You hear stories of the slow burn. The scientist who thought the systematic killing of elephants would re-enrich desert land only to have that shocking moment 20 years later that everything he’d been doing was dead wrong. The bad relationship where something finally snaps and you find yourself saying or doing things best represented in what were previously considered overly dramatic movies. Rarely are you next to the roadside bomb or getting railed by the Mack truck, the next moments only confirming you still have light receptors and tinnitus.

The best you can do is try and form a solid foundation. It’s something of an oxymoron, but I’ll take troops who’ve been through boot camp before the overzealous neighborhood watch militia any day. You want the best kind of friendships? Try and be the best of what you expect out of your friends. When things go wrong, you’ll be able to recognize if/when they’re doing the work as well. You want to be an authority on something? Make sure you’ve incorporated the lessons of those who’ve earned the right to own that authority before you.

We’re a memory. You’re basically “kind of cool” or “kind of not cool” to everyone you meet. The amount of time and circumstance it can take before someone gets a real sense of what you’re about, generally, is exhausting and often not worth it. (amIrite!?) Once people start to see themselves in you or see themselves depending on you for something is when stupid words like love come into the equation. The memory converts from merely remembering things about you to now provoking how they’ve made you feel. Add this to the list of reasons feelings shouldn’t be overstated.

Think of the Christian pride of those who are excited to knock on your door. They think they have something to share! But generally awake and thinking people see it as annoying, hollow, naïve, and kind of take pity that you can’t be happy with real things. They telegraph their bad motivation. Ironically, they think they’re trying to save you from something they’re running from. I look for people who give off the impression they think. I invest when the message is about the struggle, not necessarily the answers. After all, the answers are generally obvious once you ask why or get details.

How do they keep the faith? Ignorance and denial. They are as solid a foundation as anything, in that you can build the exact same walls as high as you like regardless of the materials. How do you maintain confidence in your relationships, your likes and dislikes, your motivation? It’s really easy to confidently masquerade as if you have a plan when no one’s asking to see it and you’ve no intention of offering it up freely. Then the truth of how little it’s built on might come to light. Then you might get stuck, having never been forced to deal with what you’re doing and what it really means. You might have to wonder how it matters, HOW ANYTHING MATTERS!? And then carry on like your mind wasn’t blown by a category 5 tornado.

It’s in doing the work that you have any real kind of foundation. A completed building just sits there. All ideas either linger or get lost forever. But when you’re in the thick of it, things get clearer. When your feet move down the path you laid out, for better or worse, but you really did everything you could to make it your path and not “a path,” things start to border on making sense. It’s when you allow yourself to create exactly what you needed to see.

Whether this helps tackle problems or not, you at least start to see the role you’re suited for. That way, if you die before the play hits the stage, at least you’ll know it was yours.

[345] YOU, You Got What I Neeed

I think one of the biggest mistakes you can make when it comes to reading my utterly scattered thoughts is to think I'm coming from a place of finality.

If you choose, once I put it all together, to read where my mind has been from front to back up to this blog, you should readily believe that I don't know shit! That I've never known shit. That I will continue to strive to even believe I have a grasp on what shit even smells like. It's sort of the nature of the game.

I believe in the ongoing conversation. I think you are allowed to show your most belligerent ridiculous point and then move right along to refining how and why you got there. I think if you settle on one idea, you're really missing the point of putting yourself out there for new ideas. How many times have I said I seek to be challenged? I can't help it if my closest friends are still bitch nigga pussies. I suppose that's just part of the game as well, you bitch nigga pussies.

It really is mind blowing to read old thoughts. It's amazing to feel so on point with something that happened years ago and I may as well have written it yesterday. I love seeing something that I haven't worked out and realizing that I did it better the next time. I'd like to say it's humbling, but it's more like work that's paid off. It's more like looking like a fucking retard for long enough that you finally get to net something positive after endlessly spewing bullshit about where you previously came from.

I think it's interesting how dramatic I've sounded. To relegate what's seemingly the most intense feeling to words in the abyss of facebook has to be a practice in humility, right? I never expect people to get it most of the time. I don't expect fans. I smile for days when someone decides to reveal they're crazy about what I write. I secretly think the people who may follow my shit the most will never reveal themselves. Who wants to say “I was that fucking crazy too!” or “holy shit, you wouldn't believe the irrational lengths I went to justifying that stupid ass position as well!

I've run the gauntlet. It's amazing to me to think about the myriad topics I've hit. It's hard to believe that somehow I haven't considered “x” with relation to “y” at least when it comes to relationships or how we conduct ourselves in life. It's hard to believe there will be more to say, but I think it's pretty obvious there will be.

I just hope it does things for you as it has for me. Sometimes, what I put out or how I phrase something is so...embarrassing. Like, who in their right mind says shit like that? That I simply must believe in the capacity for empathy over my ability to start giving a fuck what you think. That sounds harsh, but I'd be doing a really bad job of explaining anything if I capitulated to your bastardized conceptions of where I was coming from. Never take it personally.

I guess I just want to help. I wouldn't mind people being “like me,” but more so I'd like them to really get where they're coming from. I think whatever ridiculous stupid shit I go through, the best thing I can do is relate it as honestly as it seems to cut. Why would I take any pride or purpose in “ranting” if not to hijack your brain for a second and make you realize that to one degree or another I'm likely right there with you?

I'll keep talking if you're listening. As it goes with everything else, I rely on you to explain when I've over-stayed my welcome. In one vein, who am I to offer even the remotest advice? I've certainly said before you likely have to live somethings for yourself and figure it out the hard way. In the other vein, please just don't be fucking retarded. It really makes the struggle and words feel futile. It wholly reduces intent and perspective to naïve speculation. It just becomes sad.

[342] Part Deux

There's something I find very troublesome about being human. It's worse than troublesome, but I'm hoping to keep a more jovial tone. It's not something I think can be helped, nor is it necessarily malicious. It's opportunistic. And I'm hard-pressed to not avoid using the word naïve. I've gone with the word “selfish” in the past, which has had a double meaning depending on context. But I think this is more nuanced. This isn't a bratty child nor being objectively involved in your long term well-being, as I would ascribe selfish. This thing is a word I hope to find by the end.

Perhaps it's a form of self-indulgence. There's a certain amount of pleasure one gains from dictating their next move. Being arbiter of your own fate, so to speak, even if that fate is just leading you towards the refrigerator. Granting yourself a delicious reward for exercising your legs and putting your idea in motion. You understood yourself to be hungry, now revel in the ability to so quickly and effectively meet your need. Good show.

Perhaps it's a form of empathy. It can be awesome to be illuminated by the light of someone else. Follow sports? None of your players are even from the city you cheer for, sometimes neither are you, but dammed if you don't all feel good under the same banner if they win a championship. So far, you've indulged in an opportunistic chance to empathize with a sense of purpose or pride that, by all accounts, isn't really yours to have but for your ability to feel in spite of your circumstances. Lucky you.

Perhaps you couldn't possibly help yourself. Without these systems for reward and happiness, where would we find the strength to continue on? If I'm not after a fix, what's my guide? Surely I feel this way for a reason, no less! And why would you sound like you're trying to make my good feelings bad? What shame or guilt lies in my investment of sport or comfort food? Quite the chore trying to adequately surmise what either means particularly to you, I'd say.

Perhaps it's flatly ignorant. You get nowhere thinking about the people who can't eat while you're eating, so of course remain ignorant to the real extent of the plight. You don't want to worry about commercialism, waste, or exploitation when the next game comes on or all-star player's history is depicted in such a compelling way you're getting his name tattooed next to your heart. The world gets easier with a singular focus and many would argue you're quite happy and healthy “doing whatever it is the thing you do.”

Perhaps it's kind of embarrassing. You know how you said that thing, but you didn't really feel that thing, but you didn't quite have the words to clarify and your phone was off and you couldn't respond in time so you just figured that it would work itself out until you got that one text from so and so and you realize that shit, you probably should have paid more attention to your phone and told so and so that you were actually going to do that and actually meant that you were feeling like 20% this and 80% that, but it would have been totally cool were it not for if things went a different way. My bad.

Perhaps it's an excuse. Maybe you know full well, but can't admit it. Maybe you understand perfectly, but can't be bothered. Maybe it's so easy to form protracted prose in defense of oneself that the consequences of doing so have become so normalized as to become invisible.

I guess I'll just call it kinda sad.

There's something I find disturbingly reassuring in “bad” people. They have a purpose. They have a drive. You can rely on them, albeit to do that wrong thing, but dammit if you can't rely on them. Rely on their character. Rely on their motivation. Rely on their insubordination, immaturity, greed, treachery, or propensity to make your life a hassle in a few fairly predictable ways. You couldn't ask for more structure. What's the worst you have to look forward to? Them becoming good people? Well fuck, now you have to find another fuck-up and learn their ticks. Annoying, but manageable.

“Good people” are the problem. Good people take for granted. They're plagued by all the nuance and weirdness of the stuff above. Good people rely on their environment to keep a familiar structure in place that informs them that they are still, in fact, good...enough...people. You hear constantly that “most of the world is good.” Most people aren't killing each other or stealing or raping. Most people don't really give a shit these things are happening! Provided it's not to them. To me, it simply misses the point.

Statistics on murder rates or declines in violence don't speak to what it means to be human intrinsically. It's accounting for a kind of environment we're attempting to cultivate, half-assedly or accidentally, that tends to reflect in less murder, stealing, and rape as long as certain conditions are met. It's superficial. When shit hits the fan, everyone's a hoarder, potential murderer, or looking to get in one last score. The handful of angels that would rather die than adapt will surely be sitting at the right hand of the Father.

We're not guided by anything but a messy landscape of vague “morals” and behaviors that generally tend to not piss people off and generally satisfy our needs or at the very least keep us alive under whatever paradigm we're born into.

Breaking Bad anyone? How slowly can you blur the line until we're comfortable with being bad? This is why, for me, it's easier to just conceive that people “are.” I don't read into their motivation or speculate what they're getting out of what they're doing, so I'm not hats off and applause when things seem to go well nor terribly surprised or let down when they don't. At least not professionally.

This changes with a conception of friendship or family. You tend to believe these people have your well-being at heart. You don't think they're out to get you. You've been able to trust them with information or tasks that when left to their own devices still work in your benefit. And dammit! You would theirs as well. It's why you have to be careful about who you're letting into that family, as they may cause you to subtly change your perspective enough to blind you to what you've become or are justifying.

But I've had to carry on for so long as if we don't have a choice. When I believe we have a choice, my day is basically ruined. If everyone is actively doing and saying the things they do, in their most earnest, and this is the best we get, I don't think I can spend another night in this hotel. If we're meant to fly by the seat of our pants through this blob of ever-morphing concepts of self that seem to contradict and shit on everything around us...just ugh. It would be interesting, but that's provided you were actually trying to get somewhere.

I wear the badge of “bad person” as a kind of honor. I know when I can call upon the worst demons, of all of our nature, to get what I want, or at the very least, get done what seems necessary. I tend to do. I tend to mean what I say. I tend to feel it, and think it, and spend much time defending it. I choose. And I usually feel like I know why I'm choosing. It's why I feel like I know why I'm choosing to quit.

You may not even recognize a change, but for the discernible future, I'm done. I don't get depressed or anxious or suicidal, I detach. I can feel the pull of, whatever it is about other people that just seems “kinda sad.” It looks like selfish, it feels like dumb, IF ONLY it was explicitly either. I think I can see the end game. I think I understand that even when it's good, I just haven't finished reading the story. I can't take the headache of worrying about it. At least not right now. It's not an indictment, I'm not angry, it's just a choice.

[337] On Being Drunk

I like being drunk. Let me tell you why.

Drunk affords opportunities. For me, it makes me feel like a kid. Let me elaborate. When I'm sober, things are “meh.” They happen. You feel good or bad about something, I hear about it, all I can do is go, yep, that in fact happened, let's see if you'll do something smart to follow. I beat into the ground terms like “relative sociopath” for this reason. I will likely never find the amount of words to describe just how little a shit I care about most things. Like, it's probably problematic because it presents a giant empathy-devoid wall between me and most of how people operate. It will likely be a theme I run with in future blogs. Just get it now, it matters.

But it all changes with alcohol! It's lighter. It's the kind of feeling laden honesty that you expect from a “normal human being.” I feel like a kid again. It's valid when I tell you you're cute. My “hatred” stems from a more real place. Things matter. All that I'm concerned with is that you understand what's brewing in my gut because god dammit, IT'S BREWING IN MY GUT!

And I like this. I like it a lot! I don't want to get bogged down in pretext in games and odd agendas with marginally stated goals. It's important to me to have some kind of beacon, in whatever form it takes shape, and express the sort of “ground floor” of where I'm coming from. A person with this many ideas of manipulating and carrying on with reckless abandon to many kinds consequences treats this level of pure base expression as a drug.

The thing that will forever continue to kill me is the reactions from other people. It's easy to use the language of someone with a problem without being a stupid fuck with a problem. Not many seem to understand this. I have no genuine urge to drink just because I see other people doing it. I know full well how to have a pretty insane amount of fun without drinking. It's just not the same. It's so infinitely selfish. The one and a half times I might be able to get drunk a month usually translate into a blog haha. Not even speaking remotely to the kinds of fun we used to have at my old house.

It just feels like an opportunity. As long as I'm able to think myself left or right, I'm not going to be able to act “fundamentally.” And it's everything I want to see in people as well. If you black out and turn violent, I think that's an important thing to know about yourself. I don't like the idea of being afraid of yourself. If I manage to not remember something, it's usually some heartfelt diatribe about how much fun I'm having with who's ever in the room. I'm not scared to do or say something stupid because it seems as if there's a fairly clear line between “who you are” and “what the fuck alcohol had to do with your personality.” I think people are general pussies when it comes to playing this game.

I don't think being drunk invalidates a position. When you feel something at your peak earnest, how you got there is frankly irrelevant to me. There always seems to be this underlying world that people are afraid to access. It's the only world I care about. I'd rather try to relate at that level and have everything go to shit than pretend like I care about anything else. And this is what I'm after in other people.

I don't mind feeling. I don't think it's bad or wrong or in and of itself a bad thing. And being a few beers in, just before I'm racist or sexist for no reason, it's like a reminder of how normal people behave. I get to just be someone who's experiencing instead of dictating. I want you to say that thing you'd never say. I want you to contemplate why you fell face first down that level of stairs. For me, it unlocks a kind of potential and perspective that I cherish. I think at the very least it can provoke a level of introspection that being a whiny “intellectual” can't afford you.

It can be fun. It can be an opportunity. I don't want to spend my time justifying that which seems simple and obvious.

There's a whole "why can't you just be/feel/think yada yada while your're sober" discussion that if I had the right answers to I would have already written about so preempt something or go fuck yourself ;).

[336] It Don't Mean A Thing If It Ain't Got That Swing

I've been inside a kind of deadness lately. It's not sad or dramatic. It's flat. Maybe it's just a special kind of tired. I'm not sure, but all I know is that it's a special kind of non-feeling. To generally run rather tepid when it comes to things, then to get excited, is very much a high. It's not a terribly lasting high, but the contrast is noteworthy. But when nothing seems to register, even if it's for a short time, it becomes noteworthy as well.

A few examples. While everyone is naming their new babies after a fictional pair of meth dealers, I can call it a pretty good episode. While I'm assuming there's an invigorating passion to spend the next several months flying new machines and blowing people up, I'm reminded I have 2 video games I haven't opened and a 3rd I've been playing for months and might be half way through. I think about how quick, although I know it's not that quick, friends seem to pass through your life and really really want to press people to figure out why or why not I should be someone in their life. I see more people getting shot up and think “of course...onto more pressing concerns like dick cutting pictures.” I'm getting back into business and realize that whether it does or doesn't work, I'll know what to do.

It's all just stuff that's happening.

To the point on friends, I don't like to feel as if I'm treating them as passing acquaintances. It influences very much what I do or don't and how I engage with them. I can believe that it can be viewed as a kind of insecurity. Like, just act natural Nick P! It's your friends after all. But I understand relationships as work. Me, natural, doesn't treat people as people. So I need to dial back natural for better things like respect. I deliberately hinder my mind of thinking of friends as “marginally intentional beings with fleeting pithy feelings I need to deliberately navigate in order to achieve x, y, and z.”

In that instance, I'd rather be misunderstood as a bumbling idiot killing the mood or deliberately awkward, instead of understood as someone who would treat you that way.

I'm certain this is hard to understand, mostly because it has everything to do with me and nothing really to do with you. It's the odd ways I can be made to think or feel and the work my rules do or don't help with that. To say I take my friendships personally is to say I have as much invested in the story I can tell about myself as I can about our relationship. It's an ever-present conversation during a high stakes game.

I don't think winning belongs to the smart, or loud. Sincerity wins. They believe you when you believe you. It's less what you say than it is they believe you. Feeling this deep in your gut and knowing what it means is what necessitates my “anti-behavior.” If I can't make you aware of a path I see, I might find myself on it and not terribly comfortable, nor necessarily convinced against, what it means if I keep following it. So help me keep dialogue open. The more I can fumble over words and persistently go nowhere, probably dunk, in person, the less I can recede so far into my head that I can't hear anything.

I want to feel normal, but not at your expense.

[333] Fools Rush In

I want to run with a more positive idea. I often refer to how people behave and what they engage in as circle-jerking. Their avoidance of fact and reality perpetuating a mental stability and happiness that throws caution to the wind and whose goal is the bad kind of selfish. Surely, from a big picture, this is all we can expect as there is no grand determined right and wrong and the idea of “holding on for dear life” is as effective as anything else. I want this to stop ringing as such a bad thing for me.

I don't so much have a problem with what people do. I don't care if you are the best heart surgeon or video game developer. I find an “equal” kind of happiness in thinking I can get my heart repaired as enjoyment from a compelling story. I would take this a step further and say that maybe finding any form of artistic expression, specialized hard fought experience that gives you a rare and valuable opinion, is one of the noblest forms of purpose.

What's really bugged me is the lack of consciousness and awareness. When you say something without the opposite of, or what would make it wrong, ringing in your mind at the same time. When you pursue things “because.” When you judge and blame, and feel everything while forgetting your responsibility or role.

It speaks to my personality. Why do I keep making the same kinds of jokes with the same “inappropriate” themes? If it gets a rise out of you, you may not be aware of the role it plays in your life. If you feel bad before you wonder why I said something, it's an opportunity. You can either learn something about me, or yourself in the context of me, or I can learn I don't necessarily want to be around you. Win win. But even when it's just delving into a person's life, it's the same search.

I don't have something deeply invested in anyone else's relationships. Maybe I want to fuck around with your girlfriend, but that plays significantly less a role in how I talk to them or what about than you'd care to believe. And don't let me pigeon hole the word relationships because I mean it to be about any and every one you choose to have. Sometimes it's a happy accident that you had the best parents or grew up with the best friend. But it doesn't have to be that way and I think it's downright destructive when you try to force something to work beyond all evidence to the contrary.

It's never been enough for me to “just do it.” I can't just have a girlfriend or just get a degree, or just own a business. It's genuinely more satisfying to rot if I don't understand my motivation. I don't quite understand the point is all. I don't understand getting invested if you don't believe in something and if you're going to believe in something, you damn well better make sure you know why. “Why” is the privilege. Why is the only thing we do that nothing else does, as far as we know. Knowing why seems to hold a special kind of dignity. This would explain why so many people claim they really do in fact know why!

You can set yourself up to do better. Musicians who just pump out albums because they can or there is some unreasonable expectation from their label surely feel the criticism from betrayed fans. Look at a Youtube channel that was brilliant in it's first 100 episodes when the 16 year old had nothing but time and creativity until they got a sponsor and had a quota. When you know why you're doing it, you know why or when you should stop. The example you leave won't be a brand, it will be your intention. You can say “because I'm an entertainer” not “because I had no choice.”

“Why” opens up the world of choice. It makes you contemplate any moment. It makes you constantly have to justify and reinforce that what you're doing is in line with who you are or how you actually think. It can obviously be a paralyzing force as well, which may not be a bad thing. Maybe you do more than hesitate to do something stupid and just decide to appreciate why you shouldn't do it. Or, of course, knowing explicitly why you did something stupid is just as satisfying.

I think a lot of people don't like the word or find an easy way to answer it because they constantly arrive at “I don't know.” As if that's a terrible thing. To not know something and at least be aware of that fact is better than charging head first into the darkness. It also can be a great place to start gathering more information so you can start knowing. I think the defensiveness kicks in about here. If you start to not really know why you believe in god, or love your partner, or pursued a career, BY GOD! WHAT ELSE DON'T YOU KNOW!? It's easy to claim something makes you happy when you haven't defined happiness or bother yourself with justifying that definition.

In this way I'm slightly worried about creativity and mass produced entertainment. I'd like to believe that you had to be “good” to start garnering an audience or leave a lasting impression. Anymore, as long as you can be talked about, it seems to suffice. You don't have the new take, the fresh look, the next big thing, or even make a fair point. Things just are or aren't “marketable.” They mesh well with this eras buzzwords. They have a look that resembles that big thing, oh you know from a month ago, but with bigger tits.

I think the more whys you answer, the more you can flesh out your personality. You can do more things that speak to your subconscious, your feels as translated through your thoughts. One of the ways I avoid staying in a perpetual state of distress and hatred is to remind myself of how little I yet know. That's frustrating in and of itself for sure, but as much as I'd love to point a million fingers, I always sink back into my gut knowing it's not the whole story. And if I can't know the whole story, what theme should it carry that makes it one worth learning from or telling?

And it's this “Human Story” that I want to contribute towards and have people take away from. I'd love to inflate the theme with air only I can blow. If I'm even remotely different, let alone different in an “important” way, whether you catch one thing I do or read everything I've ever done, I'm nothing if I'm not speaking towards why. If I'm a process it's a fools game to consider yourself with the beginning and end. I'd rather be an example than left up to interpretation. Spilling paint on a canvas isn't art. I would hope that why they did it was compelling.

[332] Cynics, Save The World

There’s utility in being a cynic. You don’t have to waste time playing pretend with the other children. When you’re government is fucked, it’s easy to recognize that it’s not in fact a democracy and there is little hope. When you see how we handle foreign relationships, you don’t have to guess that the impacts will be many and lingering. Before we get too far, it may help to have George Carlin in your head as much of this is written after a morning spent contemplating his prescriptions.

There is little I disagree with when it comes to Carlin. I don’t think we’re going to last. I think we’re addicted to things we don’t need that don’t work and don’t matter. I think this is a circus where the “happiest” amongst us look on in sheer wonder and awe at the kind of display you couldn’t ask for if you tried. He observes and reports, much of his act is memorization feats essentially word for word the astounding dialogue of our times. I think we’re infinitely selfish, in the bad way, and it’s all about squeezing whatever little satisfaction we can out of everything and everyone, consequences be damned. I think it’s every bit as bad as he states if not worse and we are in the throes of our inevitable demise.

Yet, I’m unable to detach. Maybe it’s because of my age or my wide-eyed naïve ideals. Maybe my definition of “hope” is so small and penetrated that a goal becomes so modest it’s barely a goal worth having. Sure, I want to let go and ride it out and watch, but I think in particular with me, it would have dramatically destructive consequences. Carlin can let go and feel like he needs to talk. I’d let go and start saying “I don’t see a reason not to.” But we’ve known for some time how and why I keep myself in check.

I want to believe there is a not so hidden genius in his method and advice to just detach. There’s still some level of irony in not caring about anything “but.” It’s a psychological necessity sometimes, sure, but it’s not the only, or necessarily the best means by which people are happy or found some level of contentedness. I think he knew that and that’s why he kept getting on stage. I also think he knows that when you reach rock bottom you start to figure things out in a different way. Whether you need to drop off and not care or vehemently disagree with him, you’re still going to end up in a more thoughtful and attentive place, exercising that brain he believed we’ve all taken for granted.

But let’s go back to being cynical. Only when you cut out the bullshit are you capable of identifying and addressing a situation for what it is. If you call it a problem, you’ll know better how to fix it. If you call it a shit show, you’ll know better where you want to sit. You’ll never catch me seriously wondering what a god thinks about my sex habits or the Reese’s I stole from Wal-Mart. I think you can easily assume that, but more-so, I’d be completely useless to you. I wouldn’t even accidentally come across something “new” or insightful or ever make an awesome metaphor again. You didn’t come here for bullshit…usually.

Because I haven’t just sat on my rose-colored glasses and effectively threw them into a wood chipper, I feel a sense of overall clarity even when attempting to explain my confusion. At the very least, I’m not making it up. I’m not sad or pissed off for no reason and likewise for when something feels genuinely hopeful. Carlin talked of a phrase “when you scratch a cynic you see a jaded idealist.” I think an intrinsic property of being an idealist is an inability to let go of the ideas you think will actually work. No real idealist gives up because they are painfully stuck with a brain full of ideals. It’s a burden and work. When it gets to be too much it seems to be a passive aggressive taking of the reigns to describe how you’re going to just sit back and watch it burn.

Carlin stated that he doesn’t even know if he’d be the same kind of person if he started his career today. With the kinds of technology and rapidly changing environment, who’s to say his perspective wouldn’t have been carried a little farther. When you saw something as a 20 year old in 1960 is not how I saw something as a 20 year old because I got to see what you saw when I was 15, plus 50 more examples and how and whether potential solutions played out all over the world. I can’t so easily set into “this is how it works” when I know how to change it and change it quickly.

I think it’s the cynic that knows how people think. They know what to say to make people think. They know what you feel when your thoughts take you places, and they know how you avoid them and what it would take to make you unable to avoid them. I think people recognize that they need to be saved and can’t do it themselves because they don’t have the correct language or attitude. They’re too stressed, they’re too afraid, they’re at the end of not just one horrible decision that has created a hole where adopting an “I don’t give a fuck” attitude isn’t enough. I think people say save me and the cynic says you aren’t worthy. You are the problem. You are what you’re afraid of. And who’s admitting that? Not without a smile and laugh, that is.

We will live and die by our superstitions, our allegiances to branding and the status quo. And we’ll do it slowly using soft language and remaining “decent enough” until our time runs out. This is convention and it’s why I hate convention. It’s why I’m always asking why and asking YOU why and wanting to know more. You may not care about the consequences or want the short term fix, but I’m compelled to call-out a junkie.

The nicest way I can put it is that I want the species to last for me and mine. It’s sheer ego. I want my kids happy and healthy. I want my friends recognized and admired for what they are. I want the big human middle finger staring in the empty abyss of space for as long as I can, and I want to know that it’s mine. As far as I know, I’m the only kind of thing on this planet that can appreciate what it’s flipping off. Anyone else along for the ride is just circumstance. “They” can’t be fixed, nor is “the world” broken. It’s every intention, good or bad, and if you want yours to last, that's what needs to be accounted for.