The past hides behind the thin veneer of the present. As time passes new layers of reality are added on top of what was -in some places thicker and in others fine and transparent- burying it beneath sediment of change.

From the time one is born until ones death this cycle of alteration replaces an individual’s reality, forcing him to re-establish connections to it or reinvent himself so as to maintain relevance and comfort. But as age begins to affect adaptability and as ones waning strengths condemn him to fall behind in this struggle, the individual eventually wakes up in surroundings totally alien to him. The world as he knows it is gone, or rather buried there in front of him behind the surfaces but completely out of reach.

Sometimes, here and there, due to the thinness of the subsequent layers of progress, some remnants of his past show through and fill him with sentimentality, nostalgia and a sense of loss and alienation.

This process of consistent change is more pronounced or more noticeable in environments with a rich historic past, such as Greece, where ancient monuments very often stand side-by-side with more modern structures or where previous cultural norms coexist and often compete with more recent ones. It is in such places that an underlying sadness and fatalism accompanies every individual through the course of his life. Change is exaggerated in a patchwork of not-so-buried pasts, where contrasts and juxtapositions are imposed daily on the senses.

Every human being is himself a product of his time. He mirrors the musical and artistic tastes of his history; he represents the behavioral and moral rules of his past–most often of his youth, in which time an individual becomes a willing and vulnerable recipient of external influences.

In time, he finds himself to be also a remnant of a bygone age and an artifact of the world, now called ‘ancient’ or ‘old’.

For most the boundaries between past, present and future are well-defined and stand in sharp contrast to one another. For them the sensual input of any given moment defines their position in history and determines the course of their actions. The past is but a shadow in their mind; a source of recollection filtered through the distorting forces of remembrance but condemned to dwindle in significance as the temporal distance is increased between each moment.

The future becomes an imagined supposition to be planned for but not to be overly preoccupied with. What is to come can only be thought to mirror what has been or be exaggerated and glorified through human need and hope.

For some few though, for those sensitive, artistic restless souls that float in limbo in time, the past, present and future intertwine in a distracting jumble of chaos. They not only exist in every instance of their past but can project themselves in time to the future.

Wanderer have you read Marcel Proust's 'Rememberance of Things Past'? Very curious as to what you would think of the work which basically attempts to re-live the singular moments of our existence (his own really). Think of what it was like the very first time one tasted honey or viewed a foreign landscape? That moment is always lost even when we exprience it again and again. Never can one rekindle the singular sensation of the first time, we forget, take it for granted and never recall the uniqueness of that moment. But now on to your text (let me know if I am completely off base and have misinterpreted your essential meaning):

The past is important only in how it influences us in the present. The past is the series of consequences that creates the moment. The future is an imagined supposition because it doesn't exist. Only the now or the moment of now exists and that is what eventually determines the future as we lay the groundwork for where we would like to be. I look at the past as a dream state, a filtered state of mind colored by whatever we are at the moment. Our true freedom never exists in the past or future but only in the present.

I am curious about this statement: "But as age begins to affect adaptability and as ones waning strengths condemn him to fall behind in this struggle, the individual eventually wakes up in surroundings totally alien to him. The world as he knows it is gone, or rather buried there in front of him behind the surfaces but completely out of reach."

Why should age affect adaptability? Why can we not adapt and change even if we have an investment in the past? How much really changes anyway? How different is the rebel yell of youth to the youngins of 100 years ago? It is the same song being sung under a different guise. What seems to change most of all is the external environment around us. A very old woman may feel very uncomfortable using a computer and would be happy with her mechanical typewriter, but that does not mean she cannot learn, adapt and represent herself in that new culture, even if she brings the past along with her.

The loss, nostalgia and alienation you speak of is not necessarily exprienced only by those who have a long history behind them. Look at how many who have not lived in the time of antiquity hanker for what was of that time. They compare the values and lifestyles and feel alienated within modern society. One of the reasons for example that I love Cambodia so much is because it has not yet adapted to modern civil society. It is technologically undeveloped (specifically in the provinces). When I visit Angkor Wat I look at a ruin which represents the most advanced society in the region of its time. It still stands majestic as a reminder to all Khmer's of what they were but will probably never be again. Where it once stood as a sign of wealth for all Khmer people it is now a ruin where children go to beg from tourists. In the city the royal palace stands out in gold next to modern buildings that make it or the buildings look silly and out of place. History is the bridge for both the past and the present but the individual if they are paying attention knows that he cannot attach himself to either. If he attaches himself to the past he will not be able to adapt to the present, if he negates the past he knows no glory, if he forgets the past he will have no springboard into the future and no guiding post of wisdom. I say we have to live all three in the moment.

On a personal note: My past has always been something demanding attention in the present and at times that has been a mistake. Sometimes we have to shirk off the past in order to reinvent ourselves.

Perhaps I have misunderstood but there is something sad about how you represent aging. I believe the old laugh at the present because they recognize that its all the same nonsense being repeated over and over again. Time and time again few learn from the past, it is negated and what is new is hailed as superior when it too shall pass away into nothingness leaving just a ruin to remind us of....

Lucysnow

Wanderer have you read Marcel Proust's 'Rememberance of Things Past'?Nope.

Why should age affect adaptability? Why can we not adapt and change even if we have an investment in the past?
Because even a none-materialist eventually manages to own enough things to become less flexible.

The roots of conservatism are found here.

How much really changes anyway? How different is the rebel yell of youth to the youngins of 100 years ago? It is the same song being sung under a different guise. What seems to change most of all is the external environment around us. A very old woman may feel very uncomfortable using a computer and would be happy with her mechanical typewriter, but that does not mean she cannot learn, adapt and represent herself in that new culture, even if she brings the past along with her.
I’m reminded of that quote that states: ‘The more things change the more they stay the same.’
But external changes are what we observe daily.
These eventually lead to a sense of alienation.

On a personal note: My past has always been something demanding attention in the present and at times that has been a mistake. Sometimes we have to shirk off the past in order to reinvent ourselves.
What got me thinking about this topic is when I heard on the news about some star that had passed away.
I became aware of the world dieing around me and imagined myself, on some future date, when all that I had known and all those I had grown up with were but memories of the past with no present anymore.
Can you imagine how that would feel?

Read Proust I think you would really appreciate his work. Please give an example of how owning material possessions leads to one becoming less flexible? I would have thought that being flexible or not is a state of mind. I have met very inflexible 20 year olds and they haven't yet had the opportunity to own (see or experience) much of anything. Maybe it is something else at work. Sometimes we give the material too much credit. And what about alienated youth? Alienation is a condition of a modern age and affects just about everyone! And whether one is old or young people feel alienated for different reasons. I feel alienated in the West for example, feel cut off but I am not quite sure why. As for the question of how I would feel if all I had grown up with had ceased to exist? Well much of it has I'm afraid. Change is speeding up! Every decade is dramatically different from what came before it (though I think this is less of a truth in undeveloped nations). Just think of how dated everything looks and sounds from the 80's. Ultimately we are alone in our experience even if it was shared with others (I believe you know this already). I believe its our awareness of the passage of time that makes change difficult. We are conscious of aging, conscious of death, but the knowledge that even we shall come to an end can be a source of energy! It is a signal to grab hold of each passing moment (proust's theme), to live as if we are conscious of our passing. There is a Canadian film produced by the Almodovar brother's called 'Life Without Me'; it touches on this topic and is absolutely beautiful. Many external changes bother me somewhat because I find it all too plastic and utilitarian, lacking in aesthetics (just my opinion), but these changes are secondary to what we prioritize and where we focus. I think this thread is not so much about time but the loss that comes with it. Perhaps we should discuss how we accept, integrate and deal with loss.

What got me thinking about this topic is when I heard on the news about some star that had passed away.
I became aware of the world dieing around me and imagined myself, on some future date, when all that I had known and all those I had grown up with were but memories of the past with no present anymore.
Can you imagine how that would feel?

It is about getting old, and how our memory representation changes over time. As you get old, there are so many things to remember, yet even though so many years back, they feel as if they had happened just a moment ago -- and at some point, you begin to feel this very clearly. 1994 seems like yesterday to me. 10 years seems a lot of time, esp. if looking to the future, yet 10 years into the past seem like nothing.


From the time one is born until ones death this cycle of alteration replaces an individual’s reality, forcing him to re-establish connections to it or reinvent himself so as to maintain relevance and comfort. But as age begins to affect adaptability and as ones waning strengths condemn him to fall behind in this struggle, the individual eventually wakes up in surroundings totally alien to him. The world as he knows it is gone, or rather buried there in front of him behind the surfaces but completely out of reach.

Sometimes, here and there, due to the thinness of the subsequent layers of progress, some remnants of his past show through and fill him with sentimentality, nostalgia and a sense of loss and alienation.

I'm sorry, but this is such a dreadfully fatalistic view. As if one were once perfect and pure, and then life and time had besmirched him.
-- Such thinking comes from believing that an individual's personality is set in stone at some age, and that further on, life is just about water dripping on that stone, slightly gnawing it away, and about putting nice covers on that stone.

In some other thread, you said one is to "remain flexible". How is a stone to remain flexible ...

Lucysnow

Read Proust I think you would really appreciate his work. Please give an example of how owning material possessions leads to one becoming less flexible?
Take your voyage to Cambodia as an example.
If you were older and, in that time, you had accumulated a certain amount of stuff, that also requires upkeep and maintenance [car, house etc.] and personal routines that made you feel comfortable and grounded in a particular environment [friends, job, children], how able could you have been to just get up and travel half way around the world for an indeterminate amount of time?

Maybe it is something else at work. Sometimes we give the material too much credit. And what about alienated youth? Alienation is a condition of a modern age and affects just about everyone! And whether one is old or young people feel alienated for different reasons. I feel alienated in the West for example, feel cut off but I am not quite sure why. As for the question of how I would feel if all I had grown up with had ceased to exist?
I believe it is this constant and rapid change that creates feelings of alienation and the counter-reaction of rebelliousness and dysfunction that are 'in style' these days

Why are you so attracted to that Cambodian life-style, if not because it is a return to a more basic, simpler way of living, where things are more comprehensible and immediate? You feel connected to your environemnt there, no?

Why are so many of us imagining the supposed superiority and nobility of previous ways of interacting with the environment, if it is not that we feel cutoff from the present and disillusioned with the speed and the direction of progress that leaves us scrambling to catch up and adapt? We are made to feel inconsequential and helpless in the west.

There was a time when one spent an entire lifetime in one job, and most often in one place.
Today the process of alteration, forces multiple career changes and no job is guaranteed for over a few months.
Technologies are advancing at breakneck speeds and the way we do things alters yearly; information is everywhere, art and creativity abundant with no accompanying hint of quality and dependability.
This makes many dream of a more primitive way, where control is retaken by the individual away from the environment.
Making philosophers and thinkers like Nietzsche, an attractive alternative to the actual world.

Many external changes bother me somewhat because I find it all too plastic and utilitarian, lacking in aesthetics (just my opinion), but these changes are secondary to what we prioritize and where we focus. I think this thread is not so much about time but the loss that comes with it. Perhaps we should discuss how we accept, integrate and deal with loss. Maybe you find current aesthetics less pleasing because of what I am talking about. You can’t relate to it, whereas for someone growing up in this time this aesthetic is all he/she knows and so finds it adequate.
Is Rap truly crap or is it that we can’t relate to its aesthetic? :confused:

As for the integration and dealing with loss, I can only speak from personal experience and say that for me the first decades of my life were ones of curiosity, struggle and filled the wonderment of self and world discovery. They were times of acquisition and the coveting of reality.

Recently I have become more content and yet more aware of the process of loss happening around me.
The world is more predictable and less wondrous, and my covetousness has turned to apathy and boredom.

RosaMagika

It is about getting old, and how our memory representation changes over time. As you get old, there are so many things to remember, yet even though so many years back, they feel as if they had happened just a moment ago -- and at some point, you begin to feel this very clearly. 1994 seems like yesterday to me. 10 years seems a lot of time, esp. if looking to the future, yet 10 years into the past seem like nothing.
Precisely.
That’s where the mind tries to integrate the present sensual input with past memories.

For instance: You walk down a street you once played in as a child and it is now different, due to your perspective to it and in how you’ve detached from it over the years.
New children play in the schoolyards you ran in, new establishments have been erected in the places you frequented and in your search for a reconnection you realize you are a stranger to them now, a foreigner in your own homeland.
Cultural icons, you grew up with, slowly die away, friends and loved ones deteriorate and pass away leaving empty spaces and a world of unfamiliarity.

I'm sorry, but this is such a dreadfully fatalistic view. As if one were once perfect and pure, and then life and time had besmirched him.
-- Such thinking comes from believing that an individual's personality is set in stone at some age, and that further on, life is just about water dripping on that stone, slightly gnawing it away, and about putting nice covers on that stone.

In some other thread, you said one is to "remain flexible". How is a stone to remain flexible ... Sorry to invade your romantic idealism.

It has nothing to do with perfection or purity.

Personality may not be set in stone but it hardens through time.
The degree to which it hardens is determined by multiple factors: genetics, environment, history, chance, choices.

How does one remain flexible?
Through complete detachment.

Is it possible?
To varying degrees and difficult in the world we live in.

A human being needs stability and the sense of belonging, so the process of rigidity is inevitable.

My motto: ‘Live Lightly’ is my personal solution to this process or maybe just my best reaction against this encroaching rigidity.
A Spartan, simpler existence enables a more flexible predisposition.

When one is younger commitments and choices have just established connections to the outside world and so detachment and reattachment is more feasible.
We jump from one direction to another, we discard and acquire things on a whim, we enter situations unconsciously knowing that there’s enough time to correct any errors made, we possess the physical energy to deal with situations as they arise, we have fewer prejudices and complexes arising from experiences and/or outside influences.

Wanderer: "Take your voyage to Cambodia as an example.
If you were older and, in that time, you had accumulated a certain amount of stuff, that also requires upkeep and maintenance [car, house etc.] and personal routines that made you feel comfortable and grounded in a particular environment [friends, job, children], how able could you have been to just get up and travel half way around the world for an indeterminate amount of time?"

True enough but I have met those who have given up their car, house etc. to make the move (sometimes even with children in tow). Its possible but I do agree that many use their possessions as an excuse as to why they cannot change their routine or lifestyle...but its still just an excuse. They are insecure or fear instability. Those who have given up Western security for Cambodia find they can have their car, house, etc. CHEAPER, than in the West. The lifestyle is better and less expensive than it is in the West and they need not give up anything. In fact many in the West cannot afford some of the comforts that are quite normal in Cambodia ie: fulltime house-keeper, driver, etc.

(W) "Why are you so attracted to that Cambodian life-style, if not because it is a return to a more basic, simpler way of living, where things are more comprehensible and immediate? You feel connected to your environemnt there, no?"

In a way I am not connected to the environment there because I live in an expat world, and as neo-colonialist as that may be, it insulates me from many of the problems that Cambodians themselves must endure. I enjoy Cambodia because its less regimented and more wild! Definitely simplified. Basically I enjoy the freedom found in a certain kind of chaos which is how the country functions (or not depending on your perspective). In Belize I am 'connected' to the environment because of the land and the necessity to develop and live off the land; touching the soil, landscaping, building a wall or a concrete house, etc. Belize is far more simple than Cambodia. Belize is quiet and politically stable, cambodia is not, Belize has no 'scene' and Cambodia does. Belize is not afflicted with many of the social problems Cambodia has, by comparison it is more of a paradise if one is in a retiring and quiet mood.

(W) "we feel cutoff from the present and disillusioned with the speed and the direction of progress that leaves us scrambling to catch up and adapt? We are made to feel inconsequential and helpless in the west."

Can't argue with that!

(W) "Maybe you find current aesthetics less pleasing because of what I am talking about. You can’t relate to it, whereas for someone growing up in this time this aesthetic is all he/she knows and so finds it adequate."

Yes and no. I also have grown up with modern aesthetics. I was raised in New York so I understand the speed, the plasticity and constant change. Sometimes its enjoyable but now I find it to be an incredible bore. I think I am driven towards a new kind of stimulation and excitement. I don't want to become enslaved by this lifestyle like so many of my peers. I want CHOICE! So I have created that choice for myself. What have I given up? Insurance policies, taxes and fear of 'not making it'. The security of the West in my mind is just an illusion of security. In Cambodia there is no security and the Cambodians would be the first to remind me of that. And by the way rap sucks in general (just my opinion folks!)

(W) "Recently I have become more content and yet more aware of the process of loss happening around me. The world is more predictable and less wondrous, and my covetousness has turned to apathy and boredom."

Exactly! That's it! This is what I feel when I return to NY apathy and boredom. Cambodia is unpredictable and wondrous, as are many places around the world but it is not without change because it is developing (at least in the capitol, the provinces are a different story). NY is the known. I agree with 'live lightly' but I don't think we should think in terms of stability because there is so little of it. I mean many Americans are two paychecks away from homelessness. (*smiles*) Planes can fly into buildings without notice. In Cambodia civil war can break out if the CPP is challenged. In Belize ones business or crops could fail. The only stability that counts is internal; ones ability to adapt when...things fail.

Sorry to invade your romantic idealism.

Heh. It's not romantic idealism, even though it may likely look that way.


Personality may not be set in stone but it hardens through time.
The degree to which it hardens is determined by multiple factors: genetics, environment, history, chance, choices.

What if "it hardens" is an ill-placed metaphor? Is it not more productive to take a cognitivistic stance and say that memory representation changes as we grow old?

Note that this isn't yet another "lace and perfume version" of an ugly thing: the way we intepret ourselves and the world is in mutual causal relation to how we value ourselves and the world. Thus using more benevolent or positive terms and metaphor is a self-fulfilling prophecy with a much better ending than the the one that uses harmful and negativistic terms and metaphors.


How does one remain flexible?
Through complete detachment.

I disagree. Humans are homely beings, we need attachment.


A human being needs stability and the sense of belonging, so the process of rigidity is inevitable.

Attachment indeed often results in rigidity; but this happens because people often take attachemnt for granted, and forget about it. Attachment itself is not bad and does not necessarily lead to rigidity; taking attachment for granted likely ends bad and in rigidity.


My motto: ‘Live Lightly’ is my personal solution to this process or maybe just my best reaction against this encroaching rigidity.
A Spartan, simpler existence enables a more flexible predisposition.

What about the human hedonistic nature?


When one is younger commitments and choices have just established connections to the outside world and so detachment and reattachment is more feasible.
We jump from one direction to another, we discard and acquire things on a whim, we enter situations unconsciously knowing that there’s enough time to correct any errors made, we possess the physical energy to deal with situations as they arise, we have fewer prejudices and complexes arising from experiences and/or outside influences.

Are you American? I'm asking this because in Europe, we often view Americans as extremely unattached in comparison to Europeans. To us, it seems like Americans are constantly changing, moving, mostly superficial and flat, there's no stability in life and in relationships, everything is extremely short-term.

Lucysnow

True enough but I have met those who have given up their car, house etc. to make the move (sometimes even with children in tow). Its possible but I do agree that many use their possessions as an excuse as to why they cannot change their routine or lifestyle...but its still just an excuse. They are insecure or fear instability. Those who have given up Western security for Cambodia find they can have their car, house, etc. CHEAPER, than in the West. The lifestyle is better and less expensive than it is in the West and they need not give up anything. In fact many in the West cannot afford some of the comforts that are quite normal in Cambodia ie: fulltime house-keeper, driver, etc. Everything is possible but few things are probable.

But there are other things besides material and relationship ones that weigh a mind down.
Experience has a tendency to eliminate multiple choices for the sake of the known.
We become creatures of habit and neuron pathways, once connected tend to be reinforced through time.

Yes and no. I also have grown up with modern aesthetics. I was raised in New York so I understand the speed, the plasticity and constant change. Sometimes its enjoyable but now I find it to be an incredible bore. I think I am driven towards a new kind of stimulation and excitement. I don't want to become enslaved by this lifestyle like so many of my peers. I want CHOICE! So I have created that choice for myself. What have I given up? Insurance policies, taxes and fear of 'not making it'. The security of the West in my mind is just an illusion of security. In Cambodia there is no security and the Cambodians would be the first to remind me of that. And by the way rap sucks in general (just my opinion folks!) You aren’t addicted to control, I gather.

RosaMagika

What if "it hardens" is an ill-placed metaphor? Is it not more productive to take a cognitivistic stance and say that memory representation changes as we grow old?

Note that this isn't yet another "lace and perfume version" of an ugly thing: the way we intepret ourselves and the world is in mutual causal relation to how we value ourselves and the world. Thus using more benevolent or positive terms and metaphor is a self-fulfilling prophecy with a much better ending than the the one that uses harmful and negativistic terms and metaphors. Changing the garments you place on the people you see doesn’t alter their nature, nor does using clever up-beat metaphors change the substance of a phenomena. It just changes your perspective of it.

In the west, especially in North America, we tend to sugar coat everything.
We can’t tolerate the negative so we focus on the positive, which makes us naïve and shortsighted.
I remember watching ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ at the movies and being disappointed that it ended in an upbeat manner, contrary to the original short story which ended ambiguously.
Why does everything have to have a good ending?
Does this not make us then unable to deal with reality because we expect life to mirror Hollywood interventions?
The prevalent western naiveté concerning the totality of life makes little boys dream about war and violence and little girls about romantic weddings-with little understanding about the reality of neither- that inevitably lead to disappointment, misguided expectations, 'sour grapes' ;) and despair.

I’m not saying that focusing on the negative constantly is a solution or an alternative; I’m saying that whitewashing and metaphorically dressing-up reality only serves to prolong our misery and it does not negate it.
Covering dirt with a carpet doesn't make it go away, it just makes it invisible. Calling shit 'shit', and then attempting to clean it up, is a better method.


I disagree. Humans are homely beings, we need attachment.
Exactly, that’s why complete flexibility is impossible.
As we grow older we return to the past where attachment becomes all the more important.
See, we don’t disagree after all.

But it’s true what you say about memory.
Memory tends to cast things in a positive light. We remember instances as more enjoyable than they were, because the immediate insecurity and uncertainty is erased by knowing how things turned out.
Even negative experiences become more appreciated in hindsight; we survived them and we gained an insight into our strengths as well as an example to keep for future references, so they become treasures when while they were occurring they were stressful.

What about the human hedonistic nature? It’s a vice best contained than allowed to romp free.
Everything with balance.

Are you American? I'm asking this because in Europe, we often view Americans as extremely unattached in comparison to Europeans. To us, it seems like Americans are constantly changing, moving, mostly superficial and flat, there's no stability in life and in relationships, everything is extremely short-term.
I’m Canadian/Greek, which makes me appreciate both sides of the western psyche. I've lived in Europe for many years so I know what you are talknig about concerning Americans.
But the detachment I speak of is mostly towards material things and not human relationships.

Without human interaction the mind becomes diseased and it dies.
Socialization and thousands of years of evolution has made it an innate need of our being. A burden at times but also the source of our higher minds.

Changing the garments you place on the people you see doesn’t alter their nature, nor does using clever up-beat metaphors change the substance of a phenomena. It just changes your perspective of it.

According to cognitivistic psychology, one's perspective of things is very important. To what we *attribute* our success and our failure greatly depends on how successful we will be, and how we will view ourselves.

As for "changing the substance of a phenomenon": that can't be done anyway, I am not trying to change the substance of phenomena, das Ding an sich is unknowable.


In the west, especially in North America, we tend to sugar coat everything.
We can’t tolerate the negative so we focus on the positive, which makes us naïve and shortsighted.

Why does everything have to have a good ending?
Does this not make us then unable to deal with reality because we expect life to mirror Hollywood interventions?

It must be that the Western fear and disappointment are so big that the strive for a compensation, the proverbial "happy end" has become an obssession.


I’m not saying that focusing on the negative constantly is a solution or an alternative; I’m saying that whitewashing and metaphorically dressing-up reality only serves to prolong our misery and it does not negate it.
Covering dirt with a carpet doesn't make it go away, it just makes it invisible. Calling shit 'shit', and then attempting to clean it up, is a better method.

I wasn't "whitewashing or metaphorically dressing-up reality" -- I chose to see it in a non-selfsabotaging manner.


But it’s true what you say about memory.
Memory tends to cast things in a positive light. We remember instances as more enjoyable than they were, because the immediate insecurity and uncertainty is erased by knowing how things turned out.
Even negative experiences become more appreciated in hindsight; we survived them and we gained an insight into our strengths as well as an example to keep for future references, so they become treasures when while they were occurring they were stressful.

The benefits and drawbacks of hindsight.


Without human interaction the mind becomes diseased and it dies.
Socialization and thousands of years of evolution has made it an innate need of our being. A burden at times but also the source of our higher minds.

I don't like this -- "a burden sometimes". Something either is a burden, or it isn't a burden. You either love someone or you don't love someone.

A phenomenon cannot have identification property X, and sometimes identification property -X. Ascribing X, and sometimes -X to the same phenomenon is trying to change the substance of that phenomenon ...

Commitment, Wanderer, commitment!

Wanderer: "Everything is possible but few things are probable."

Okay but how do we know what is probable if we don't attempt what we believe is impossible?

W: "things besides material and relationship ones that weigh a mind down."

I agree and that is where the limitation lies.

W:Experience has a tendency to eliminate multiple choices for the sake of the known.
We become creatures of habit and neuron pathways, once connected tend to be reinforced through time."

I agree again but that doesn't mean that what change is needed doesn't lay in our hands. If one is not willing to give up the known its because the known hasn't made us desperate enough. We don't change because we have become comfortable and change is always uncomfortable. Notice how the elderly cannot stand even the slightest change whether it be daily routine or what they have for breakfast? They have lost the ability for one reason or another to re-adapt...but this isn't true for all. Just ask anyone who works in a nursing home. Of course I am not a 'control freak' and only feel the need to flow with changing circumstances.

W: In the west, especially in North America, we tend to sugar coat everything.
We can’t tolerate the negative so we focus on the positive, which makes us naïve and shortsighted. Why does everything have to have a good ending?

It doesn't but we cannot focus on the outcome or we then stall and become rigid (afraid to act). Staying in the moment so to speak is a way of being detached from the outcome. I have learned from experience that every choice made in the present has both positive and negative outcomes in the future so why concern ourselves? I could be run over by a truck on the way to the gym but that doesn't stop me from crossing the street. I just try and remain present while crossing to lessen the chances of being hit, therefore my focus is not across the road even if that's my aim.

W:It’s a vice best contained than allowed to romp free.
Everything with balance.

(*smiles*) The best master is the former slave. How can you ever learn to control hedonism if you 'contain' it? Let it romp free my man! If not you are really, really missing something important. I would rather exist completely in a hedonistic mode for a time than try and control all the components of hedonism. If I am contolling it then it is no longer hedonistic is it? Balance comes when hedonism is no longer enjoyable but that only occurs when it has lost its enjoyment and then one wishes to immerse themselves in its opposite (then there is balance as one learns to understand them both and they both have their places). Zorba didn't think about his hedonism. He wouldn't question it. He just assumed the position of enjoying pleasure for as long as pleasure lasted and accepted its passing.

RosaM: According to cognitivistic psychology, one's perspective of things is very important. To what we *attribute* our success and our failure greatly depends on how successful we will be, and how we will view ourselves.

Yes and no. If we set goals for ourselves and strengthen it with a positive attitude and fail anyway despondency sets in. Our positive attitude only partly affects the outcome as there are many details outside of our control. If we simply remain focused on what is right here right now we would have no problem switching from the positive to the negative and then back again. I cannot be positive all the time its impossible. When I my thoughts grow dark I live in darkness until there is something to grab hold of; funny thing is is there is ALWAYS something to drag our assess out of darkness because one cannot exist without the other; the positive and negative are bound to each other. Jesus christ my time in the East is having more of an effect than I realized.

RM: ... "a burden sometimes". Something either is a burden, or it isn't a burden. You either love someone or you don't love someone.

Oh come on! A mother who loves her child can also see it as a burden so I don't think it has anything to do with loving or not loving. All attachments carry a burden; when we love we CHOOSE to carry the burden, we welcome it as part of the attachment.