Others ~ Selected Correspondence

Affective Feelings ~ Emotions and Passions

As I understand it, in suppressing you use control/will/force/aggression based on no/partial/intellectual understanding of the feeling. You try to change the course of the feeling recognizing its harm (or for whatever reasons) using control/will/force/aggression. What are the advantages? One can stop the crisis. What are the disadvantages? It doesn’t end the matter fully and still all is a mystery.

Though this can be called nipping it in the bud too, in actualist terms (feel free to correct, anybody): happens really after an experiential understanding – by fully feeling the feeling without controls (in a safe setting) and seeing where it will take one. How does one do it? I don’t recall it doing it myself... though I have experienced a lot of feelings fully... I see that such an understanding takes the momentum off the feeling when it re-occurs. The understand allows one to change the course of the feeling by seeing its futility, seeing where it will take one and what ensues. I think one undergoes a change of heart/mind at the moment of feeling rather than forcefully changing it. Force might have its use too as one is dealing with ‘instinctual forces’ here and actualism being a practical business, focuses on workability rather than on morals and concepts. But the point is that suppression is using force primarily whereas actualist method is to use experiential understanding (feeling completely) primarily. Another point is that, actualism is not about ‘don’t feel’ but rather ‘feel fully’ and study it. No 75 to No 79, 16.4.2005

‘You need to respect my feelings’ is a big demand which creates division in people because it cannot be kept if each one had feelings according to whims and conditions not based on objective facts. This demand only brings disharmony in a bigger collection because it is unrealistic for one to expect others to consider your feelings all the time.

It is an invitation for being hurt. Even with the partner it may not work out all times because there is a disconnect and inherent self-centeredness of this ‘my feelings’ thing.

It enables bonding for people with similar feelings but an exact match is an utopian dream. Tolerance and respect have their limits – these limit the best that is possible. No 75, 27.3.2005

Recently Peter wrote to you, responding to a post of yours, which occurred last year. I found myself puzzling over what you said in a particular paragraph of that post. You said:

In order not to pick over the carcass of a long-dead e-mail, I would appreciate some clarification from you as to whether you still hold with these views or not. Given that this post is rather dated at this point, you may have changed your opinion of these matters. There is indeed a ‘psychic web’ connecting all human beings, and it is most obvious when interacting with people in the social environment. This web consists of the ebb and flow of emotional feelings, as well as the easily observed ‘vibes’ that people get from one another.

The thing that I find confusing about what you are saying in this passage is how a person can both interact with this ‘psychic web’ yet do so from some position of being immune from the emotional currents. Not only that, but you intimate that it is possible for a person to learn from their emotions, and once having learned from their emotions, pass on this learning in some sort of mysterious process which you dub ‘neutralizing’ the harmful aspect of the emotions.

The reason I ask you about this is that I find it to be so contrary to what I myself have experienced that I wonder if I may have missed something. It seems to me that the ability to tap into the ‘psychic web’ is an innate ability of all human beings, since all human beings are innately endowed with emotions, imagination, and are connected to other peoples via this intangible but nevertheless present cord of emotion from birth through to the grave. But then to say that a person could neutralize the harmful aspects of emotions and then pass this on to other people, it strikes me that the only thing that could then be passed on to a person is the emotion, only this emotion would be cleansed or purged of the harmful elements. I am afraid that it is all a bit unclear to me what you are saying here.

The main thing that I have learned about emotions during the time that I have been practicing Actualism is that they are a complete liability. Whether the emotions experienced are the so-called positive emotions like love, trust, faith, etc., or the so-called negative/invidious emotions of anger, rage, jealousy, etc. and the like, they are still emotions and as such they are what prevents the ongoing experience of the actual world. If one only ‘neutralizes’ the so-called harmful aspect of emotions, essentially what one is stuck with is still an emotion, only this time it is the apparent helpful aspect of emotional life. I think Peter has fundamentally hit the nail on the head when he describes this process as an accurate description of the self-aggrandizement at the heart of spirituality. To want to eliminate the harmful emotions yet hang on to the positive emotions is what spirituality and spiritual teaching and teachers aim at.

Then there are the lessons taught by therapies of various sorts, whether psychotherapy or any of the modern variants such as the numerous New Age therapies. Taking psychological therapies as a starting point, as I am best acquainted with what they are both able to offer and what their critical limitations are, I would say that the lesson of therapy is to ‘control’ and ‘regulate’ one’s emotions through a process of reasoning and ‘self-control’. This is accomplished in most talk-therapies by discharging the energy of dammed up emotions in the therapist’s office. In more progressive therapy, such as Cognitive Behavioural therapy, one learns to recognize one’s distorted thinking and dispel negative emotional states by a process of learning to recognize how one’s irrational beliefs perpetuate negative and self-destructive actions. But even with CBT, I find the focus to be on eliminating the worst excesses of emotion whilst hanging on to one’s emotional life in a more measured, ‘appropriate’ and normal manner. Actualism is radically different from these approaches as the aim is self-immolation: the radical extirpation of one’s rudimentary sense of being root and branch.

There can be no question of interacting with any ‘psychic web’ unless one’s identity is fully intact. Apperception occurs when ‘I’ cease to be, as temporarily occurs in the PCE.

In virtual freedom, one lives virtually all the time free from being a hostage to one’s own as well as other people’s emotional state. One then has nothing of a psychic nature to feed to other people, as there is no psyche in existence. Gary to No 23

Yet I cannot seem to help getting ‘caught’ by feeling-backed memories and beliefs sometimes. After all, I am not living in a state of Actual Freedom and emotions and feelings seep through from time to time. Perhaps I can help it and it has been just a failure to maintain an alert attentiveness to what is going on. In any event, rather than being cautious not to experience my feelings and emotions, I find it more useful at this point to experience them as they are and probe into the experience and compare it with non-emotive, pure sensual experiences. This way, I do not end up trying to avoid feelings and emotions all the time, which would be a spurious Actual Freedom. It is only by deliberately experiencing first-hand the passions at the core of the Human Condition that an alert attentiveness and a freed intelligence can release one from the stranglehold of the instincts. Gary to No 46

However, I find for myself that certain emotions are quite easily perceptible in certain parts of the body. For instance, strong anger is accompanied by a clenching of the teeth, a very definite sensation in the pit of the stomach, a pounding of the heart, etc. These are emotional reactions mediated by the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems, the familiar ‘fight or flight’ reactions, that are purely emotional and instinctual.

Far from it being that an emotion is nowhere, I find it quite the opposite: to be somewhere – chiefly noticeable in certain bodily changes. These are definitely perceptible, although certain emotional states I find harder to stay with and flesh out as far as what is happening in them. Some emotional states are so aversive and so powerful that it seems no matter how hard try to stay with them, there is a counteracting desire to escape from them. I think it is common convention to speak of emotions as located in the body and thoughts in the head, although the situation is obviously much more complicated than that. It seems that as a living creature one has this radar, this quick-scan survival system operating most all of the time, even during sleep, that is constantly scanning the environment for signs of danger. It even operates subliminally, without us being aware of it most of the time.

There is a very precise description of the method contained on the Actual Freedom website at the following address: ../actualism/path1.htm . It hardly seems necessary to go into the specifics to a greater extent or to re-invent the wheel. But suffice it to say that the essence of the method is to thoroughly examine and investigate everything that gets in the way of being happy and harmless. This includes every affective experience, emotion, feeling, and belief.

Just to give an example: in the morning I was on the way to work and my partner, in saying ‘goodbye’ to me, stated ‘I love you’ and lightly caressed my hand. In response to this lightly spoken endearment, I experienced a feeling of sadness mingled with regret. The feeling hit me between the eyes, so to speak, and I was interested to look into that feeling and see what I could find out about it, as it would reveal much about ‘me’. One of the things that I came up with was the realization that love in any form is always accompanied by sorrow and sadness, as for instance when love is lost. I think I also experienced a momentary feeling of pity for my partner whose expressions of ‘love’ to me are usually not reciprocated, perhaps in they are in tender expressions of caring but certainly not in word, as I never speak the ‘love’ word anymore. I think there was an irrational belief operating in me at the time that went something like this: ‘What kind of partner are you after all – you should be telling your partner that you love her’. One could easily substitute any number of words in the place of ‘partner’ such as ‘son’, ‘daughter’, ‘friend’, ‘co-worker’, etc. The irrational belief that I ‘should’ be expressing love to these people caused me to feel momentary sadness, regret, and guilt.

I have, since I started using the Actualism method, been most interested in examining my attachments to others. I use the word ‘attachment’ as being somewhat synonymous with ‘relationship’ as it is commonly used. By this I mean an emotional connection of some sort or other. It is always an emotional issue of some sort or other that binds me to another person or group of people. It of course starts in the dependent relationship of the mother and infant, is nurtured during the long period of childhood, and may grow into more stable ‘attachments’ in adolescence and adulthood. I think that one of the effects of practicing the Actualism method has been a great loosening and weakening of emotional attachments of any kind for me. I experience at times feelings of dread and angst that I am not ‘normal’ in the sense of wanting to attach myself to other people emotionally.

I seem to have no drive to form friendships in the conventional sense or to identify with other people on the usual levels. I have found it most interesting and fruitful to examine my emotional attachments to others, which all involve clinging, fear, loneliness, desire, dependency, and domination in one way or another. In short, by examining my attachments to others, I feel I have hit upon something very intrinsic to the Human Condition: those emotional ties that bind me to humanity. Loosening and eventually eliminating those ties completely is my aim but it is a most daunting course. Because in so-doing I am turning my back on those things that once gave me comfort, and am liable to experience pangs of anxious apartness, even the dread occasioned by losing large parts of my identity.

Just a quick note: when I say in the sentence above that I am ‘turning my back on those things that once gave me comfort’ I am referring not so much to deliberate repression or suppression of an experience, but as with this as well a process of finding out experientially what binds me to the Human Condition. For instance, I have found that it is not necessary for me to have ‘friends’ in the usual sense in order to be happy and harmless – quite the opposite – I have found that maintaining this system of alliances and affiliations most definitely gives sustenance to and fuels ‘me’. Gary to No 46

It seems to me that you are well on your way to investigating what stands in the way of perfection.

I can well relate to what you write as I have had these experiences myself many times. I find it interesting what pushes me to become ‘overtired’, as you say and I think the condition of ‘overtiredness’ results in many unhappy consequences oftentimes, including aggression, anger, moodiness, etc. Speaking personally, the overtiredness results from my social identity, that part of ‘me’ that relates to my ambitions, my aspirations, my ‘work ethic’, my compulsive need to be busy, etc, etc. The further I delve into the social identity, the more I run into beliefs and ideals that ‘I’ try to live by, like ‘You’ve got to keep your nose to the grindstone’ or ‘You’ve got to work hard and be a success’ and other like statements. These inner beliefs sometimes almost take the form of parental admonitions to do such and so. I can almost hear my parents saying these things inside my head sometimes.

To give a personal example, when I am tired, often I just want to be left alone and I tend to isolate myself. But a more basic question is why am I pushing myself to get into this state of being overtired in the first place? Many people, including myself, have very busy jobs where there are almost constant demands on ‘my’ time and ‘my’ attention. I find that there is a part of me that craves this constant busyness but there is a downside too in terms of exhaustion, moodiness, and other negative states, what most people call ‘stress’ or ‘burnout’.

I can add to the states that you mentioned – like feeling physically crowded, certain noises, certain temperatures, etc- that sometimes I feel uncomfortable with people coming up behind me: I sometimes feel cornered, especially when I think that people are sneaking up on me.

I think these are basically emotional reactions that stem from the primitive survival mechanism of the human creature, in this case ‘me’. I think the old ‘flight or fight’ survival instincts are being triggered, sometimes by emotional memories. It may not be an actual conscious memory of something but it may be non-verbal. I think for instance my uncomfortableness with other people touching me has to do with the emotional memory system pertaining to physical touch. Many people, including myself, were touched in some very hurtful ways, and all these experiences are in the emotional memory centre and can be triggered by things, which seem to have no connection to what is going on in the present moment.

I think the important thing to realize is that these are emotional reactions, and as such they can be investigated and pumped further for information about yourself and how you react emotionally and what makes you tick. We have often talked on this list about the difference between ignoring or suppressing an emotional experience and experiencing one’s emotions and feelings. With further practice and dedication to the method of actualism, these reactions clearly diminish in strength and intensity.

In short, what I am trying to say is that, in my experience, there is always a primitive ‘self’ behind emotional reactions, and this is where the rubber meets the road, so to speak, and it requires the ‘nerves of steel’ to stick with your investigations into the instincts. Obviously you have to find ways of dealing with feeling ‘very aggressive and violent’, as you put it in your own words.

When that happens to me, I have to examine very closely what is actually happening in the situation. When I look into it further, I find that there is no actual threat to ‘my’ survival, I only think or imagine that I am threatened. Strong emotions of fear and aggression really cloud a person’s judgement of what is really happening in any given situation.

Given that there is no real threat, I may have to find other ways of dealing with these emotions and feelings. A hot bubble bath might help or a walk in the woods. Anything to keep you from reacting in a knee-jerk manner to the upset of the moment and getting back to being happy and harmless as soon as you can should work just fine. Of course, some things that I used to do are not helpful at all, like sedating myself with chemicals or praying and hoping for relief. Often though just the simple realization that there is something that is taking me away from enjoying the present moment and that that ‘something’ is in me and is ‘who’ I think I am, but that this ‘me’ is not what I am. Nobody can change that but me.

Nobody is getting in the way of my happiness and harmlessness but ‘me’ and this is where I crank up my pure intent to be free forever from the pernicious identity that inhabits this flesh and blood body. Gary to No 41

I was wondering the same thing. I feel a bit hypocritical at times as I find myself falling back on what I learned and was taught in dealing with situations, and I think what I learned and was taught was based on the same values, morals, ethics, etc., that constitute the ‘Tried and Failed’. So there is this hypocritical feeling often. But I seemingly do not react to emotionally charged situations and I am not intimidated by people whose aim is to push other people’s buttons. That doesn’t mean I stick around to become their punching bag, it just means that I can be level-headed in a situation.

I see it is proving to be a wealth of information while no doubt being a handful at times. I also gleaned a wealth of information from my work in the market place during the actualism process, as well as being able to observe how I was experiencing a challenging and changing kaleidoscope of people, things and events. What I found was that as my malicious and sorrowful feelings diminished, I was much more able to easily do what was sensible and appropriate for the situation and that this sensibleness and appropriateness eventually became effortless.

‘Effortlessness’ is a very good way to describe it. Once one grasps the folly of remaining a passionate feeling being, the emotional faculty seems to just run out of steam or fall flat from lack of use. One is no longer pumping up one’s emotional muscles. A curious change begins to take place. I am still in the midst of this change and so there are certain parts of it that are not entirely clear to me. But the daunting or fear-evoking elements of it appear to be subsiding, being replaced by an increasing sense of ease and comfort. My experience of emotions, if they do arise in the head and heart, is that they are recognized at once and fall flat, without needing to be expressed or suppressed. It is indeed a process that involves no effort from ‘me’. Indeed, if I get hooked by an emotion, it is ‘me’ in all my glory, and the experience can be pumped for all the information possible about this particular emotion or feeling, and the corresponding belief or attitude that may be associated with it. Gary to Peter

Yesterday after reading about the ‘cognitive dissonance theory’ that Vineeto posted, I knew I had overlooked something in my posts to you. I didn’t find out what it was until today. This is the part I read that put me in conflict with myself:

‘The ‘cognitive dissonance theory’ suggests that when experiences or information contradicts existing knowledge, attitudes, beliefs or feelings, differing degrees of mental-emotional distress is the habitual result.’ I wrote to Vineeto awhile back that:

I am still a very emotional being, maybe even more so now, as I feel everything with much more intensity then I used to … yet I don’t give it credence most of the time… 30.10.2003

Vineeto responded:

When a reaction to a certain situation kept creeping up again and again, avoiding giving it ‘credence’ was not enough. I had to feel the feeling, label it, sort it out, understand it in the context of my social identity and figure out which part of ‘me’ was responsible for my emotional reaction in order to become free from it. Then I could go back to feeling excellent again and, as a result of this rooting around, was less prone to be disturbed by a similar situation. Vineeto, List AF, No 47, 4.11.2003

Well, I now experientially understand why not giving ‘credence’ to my emotions is not enough. Where I quoted you from 18.10.2003, despite your claims of ‘a change of heart’ 29.10.2003, and continued to write that

‘Maybe if you were to actually give Actualism a try…’ 16.11.2003;

is where my reaction towards you is evident. I am still prone to mistrust and thus also prone to Automorphism; as Vineeto posted yesterday:

Automorphism suggests that when you engage in a conversation in an adversarial, suspicious, aggressive and sarcastic frame of mind then you automatically conceive the other to have the same attitude. The ability to recognize that the other is entirely sincere only eventuates when you yourself cease being adversarial. Then you can really begin to benefit from what actualism has to offer. Vineeto, List AF, No 59, 17.11.2003

I apologize for assuming that you are not actually practicing Actualism, I remember how difficult it was for me at the beginning, and also for the outdated quotes. Writing to you has made it evidently clear why I have not yet reached Virtual Freedom.

One really needs all the help one can get. No 47 to No 58

I don’t think one can put thought and feeling is distinct little packages entirely cut off from one another. Given the complexity of the human brain and nervous system and the fact that one’s emotions, emanating from mid-brain regions are also represented in the higher brain centres, thought and feeling are obviously overlapped in certain respects. But it is useful to make a distinction and it is a useful distinction, between what we are calling thought, feeling, and sensation. I would like to pose a question to you: Is there a type of thought and thinking that is entirely without any emotional investment or emotional involvement?

I am still trying to figure out (in addition to practising actualism) what mental elements can be called thoughts, feelings, emotions, sensation etc. so that I can use those words properly, understand what is written. The issue seems to be quite complex to me and though one can use these terms behaviourally (to describe behaviours, particularly for others), but to label what one sees in oneself with the right name (thought? sensation? feeling? emotion) seems to be difficult to me.

I don’t think I experience it to be so hard. I find the categorization of 3 modes of experiencing: 1.) sensorial, 2.) affective, and 3.) cerebral, to be helpful in looking at what is happening at any given time. Perhaps re-reading the information on the website about these modes of experiencing the world might help? In other words, one can have a purely sensorial experience, such as the sensations that come when one rubs one’s hand across a smooth piece of glass. The initial sensations that occur, before a mental representation or percept is formed, is the sensorial experience. The sheer delight of touching, tasting, feeling, hearing the world about one is a sensorial experience. In the Pure Consciousness Experience, the experience of pure sensuousness is heightened to the Nth degree, because the experience is devoid of the thinking/feeling entity inhabiting the flesh-and-blood body. It is possible, although difficult, to remember these experiences and then trigger them again and again. The question ‘How am I experiencing this present moment of being alive?’ focuses one’s awareness on the qualities of one’s experiencing of the present moment, so that one can ask themselves:

Am I primarily experiencing affective feelings? Am I experiencing the present moment cerebrally? Am I experiencing the delightful sensations that are available to me at any given time? In other words, what exactly is taking place? For instance, if one is experiencing a particular affective feeling, an emotion, the quality of the experience can be looked into and uncovered and one can ask oneself further questions designed to investigate that particular feeling or emotion.

In this light, these are my doubts:

I don’t know if it’s ‘right’, but it seems like a useful distinction.

• to your question as to ‘thought and thinking that is entirely without any emotional investment’

1. There are thoughts that are ‘hot’ with unpleasantness or pleasantness (should I label them emotion backed?) but no apparent bodily involvement

I am reminded of Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy which speaks of the usefulness of outlining one’s ‘hot’ thoughts, such as when one is angry. In C-B therapy, attention is given to what one is thinking, in other words, the thoughts and beliefs that lie behind one’s emotional experiencing. However to say that there are ‘hot’ thoughts without any apparent bodily involvement does not accord with my experiencing of that sort of thing.

I almost always find that there are bodily accompaniments to any ‘hot’ thoughts that I have. The actualism method has helped me enormously to nip these affective experiences in the bud, so to speak, before they become full-blown emotional reactions.

Hence, I think it has enormous utility towards assisting one to become virtually happy and harmless.

2. there are thoughts without these quality of any ‘heat’ (feeling?),

Yes, I think there are. One can read an intellectual treatise of some sort, for instance, and think deeply about the material on offer without having any particular emotions about what one is reading, can’t one?

3. and there are these pure feelings of tension, fear, depression which are bodily.

I think what I have found with the demolishment of the social identity, these what you are calling ‘pure’ feelings of fear, tension, grief, etc. seem to arise more spontaneously.

But if I look into it more deeply at the time, I find that there are thoughts and beliefs operative any time that happens. But I think what is happening is that with the demolition job taking place through utilizing the actualism method, the underlying feelings and emotions are experienced more directly without the thoughts and beliefs to prop up the emotional experience, so to speak. I don’t know if that makes sense to you.

But then there is an enormous freedom that comes because one has accessed the more primitive instinctual passions that lying at the root of ‘me’ and one can experience more directly one’s instinctual heritage. I think it is the progressive and incremental bringing of these primitive instincts to the light of a clean awareness that eventually leads, inevitably and inexorably, to final extinction of ‘me’.

I am using the word thought for a mental process, probably it is appropriate to call it thought feeling or something else, I don’t know.

I don’t know if my responses are at all helpful but I have tried to convey my experiences with these things. Again, I don’t think you should get too hung-up about it all. Just enjoy the experience of being an intelligent, aware, reflective human being who is capable of experiencing all the delights that life and this present moment has to offer.

It’s really quite simple in many ways. Don’t get a case of ‘analysis paralysis’. Gary to No 33

This last paragraph here contains, I think, the most interesting questions in your post.

I think a number of things are meant by ‘expressing’ emotions. Taking it out on somebody or something is a drastic example of emotional expression, but an all too common one. Emotional expression is primarily a way that human beings communicate with one another. Emotional expression is the raw alphabet of what is commonly referred to as ‘body language’. We both sense and respond to other people’s body language on a regular basis. It is very difficult, don’t you think, to have an emotion and not express it? One doesn’t have to take it out on somebody else to express an emotion. The emotion is signalled through one’s body posturing, the expression on one’s face, one’s tone of voice and inflection, etc. One can read other people’s emotions through similar means.

It is interesting, isn’t it, how we read other people’s moods and emotions. We all signal our emotional state through subtle cues that are communicated nonverbally. The more primitive areas of the brain, those where the primary instinctual passions emanate from, are a kind of quick scan to detect these moods and emotional conditions in others. This part of the brain we hold in common with our household pets who, interestingly, are extremely adept at picking up on our moods and emotions.

There is a very thin dividing line indeed between feeling a feeling and ‘expressing’ that feeling. When I started to investigate the affective feelings, I saw number one the demand that ‘my’ moods and emotions place on other people around me. They always do and they always will put that demand on others, whether it be for attention, sympathy, love, distance, etc. One’s emotions are essentially self- centred in this way.

Empathy is not a feeling. Rather, it is the ability to project oneself into the feelings, emotions, and thoughts of another. Like compassion, empathy promises much but delivers little. Maybe a more basic question is: does the experience of empathy make one benevolent? If so, how? I don’t think we are to hold ourselves back from the experience of empathy. But I think the experience of empathy can be investigated into. Does one help others through empathizing with their pain? By sharing in another’s pain, how does that help? It may momentarily assuage the feeling of loneliness and isolation that the other feels, but what does it really do to help another?

Questions like these, and perhaps many others, might lead one to investigate the experience of empathy more closely and find out for oneself what it is all about. Gary to No 37

The only other thing I would mention is that there is another easy way of understanding the nature of the animal instinctual programming that I have run across and that is to observe children. Granted that the children that I work with as a social worker have, in many cases, been horribly abused by their parents and caretakers, but they seem not to have developed the internal controls that are inculcated by society as morals, ethics, and values, and the underlying instinctual package is plain for all to see. The malice and sorrow of these little people, their fights with one another, their pain and suffering, is readily apparent. The children are very obviously in a primitive survival mode almost all the time. The destructiveness of these self-centred passions is something I wrestle with everyday in my work.

I meant the word ‘wrestle’ both figuratively and literally. In a figurative sense, one is helping the children with their feeling responses to situations, whether by using a sort of Cognitive-Behaviour therapy (learning to think about what one is doing rather than blindly react).

But I also meant quite literally I ‘wrestle’ because sometimes physical restraint is applied if the child is physically out of control. Wrestle is really the wrong word. We call it ‘therapeutic holding’, which is a way of pinning the child on the floor when they are punching, kicking, throwing things, etc. It is designed to be a benign use of force to get them to calm down. As soon as they stop fighting and begin to relax, you begin to relax your hold on them progressively. I must say I have had mixed feelings about this holding activity. But it serves to point up to me that in our society, in childhood, one must learn ‘self’-control early lest one learn it later in life at the point of a gun. In this type of situation, one must monitor oneself constantly to ensure that one is not overreacting. Empathy is rather hard to muster up when someone is spitting in your face or trying to bite your hand off.

I think you are right that AF could be interpreted as cold detachment. However, there are other responses to painful situations besides empathy. One does not abandon caring for others by seeing the futility of empathy. It has taken me awhile to sort out these things for myself.

Working in a profession that stresses the value of empathy so much I have had to really think deeply about this all. By observing the other people that work with, I don’t think my response to these situations is markedly different than others. If my emotional reactions to highly emotional situations is attenuated or diminished, I think it has some real value in the situation in helping to calm things down. I think it is a big strength in dealing with highly enraged individuals. Gary to No 38

An extraordinary freedom comes when any memory recall begins to be free of ‘my’ psychological and psychic interpretations, when past memories become free of any emotional pains or colourings, whatsoever. This lack of emotional memories is a clear sign of ‘my’ demise, a practical example of the fact that ‘I’ have no past existence other than as psychological and psychic memories. It is experiential down to earth evidence that ‘I’ am an illusion – whose days are numbered.

I wonder if you could tell me a little more, personally, about what has happened as (you say) ‘past memories become free of any emotional pains or colourings, whatsoever’. There are certain things that have happened to ‘me’ that used to have a great deal of emotion attached to them. I feel in some respects that there has been a great withdrawal or elimination of emotion from some of these areas. I am a bit puzzled over whether this is a clear sign of ‘my’ demise or just a ‘natural process of healing’, as for instance with age or maturity. In other words, if ‘I’ have no past existence at all, then ‘I’ have no emotional memories whatsoever. ‘I’ am still very much in evidence, as evidenced by ‘my’ emotional reactions. No emotions = no reactions. What has happened to your past memories?

Yes. Then, given what you say, one could watch for evidence of seeking relief from frightened, lonely feelings by seeking immersion in the group or ‘stampeding’ back to the herd, the relatively safe and familiar world of everyday ‘reality’. I think I can see that happen sometimes in my own behaviour. But there have been other times recently when I have been intensely interested in my own dis-ease, these rather intense feelings of fear, or discomfiture, or loneliness that occasionally arise. It is a fascinating opportunity to observe the alien entity in action, to bring one’s full attention to bear on what is at the core of one’s sense of being , being a lonely, frightened, and resentful entity. There is something definitely taboo about going into this deeply. Yet tipping upon these feelings in oneself is an excellent opportunity to see the instincts in operation, to experience in oneself directly what is standing in the way of being happy and harmless. Gary to Peter

I was using the word ‘avoid’ in the sense of this ‘nipping the feeling in the bud’ that you and Richard are talking about, not so much in the sense of avoiding the Glory and Glitz of Enlightenment. I can see now that ‘nipping the feeling in the bud’ is nowhere near the same as suppressing a feeling. For instance, one can nip the feeling of anger in the bud by recognizing a situation as one in which anger has been habitually experienced or expressed. Given that one has experientially investigated into anger and aggression and understood how anger, in any and all forms, blocks the path to freedom, one has a definite choice as to what to do and experience in a given situation.

This is not at all the same thing that spiritual seekers do as in ‘turning the other cheek’ when angry or offended, which is really just a supercilious and hypocritical suppression of one’s feeling state. The actualist experientially investigates feelings and emotions as they come up, whereas the spiritualist is intent upon following spiritual or moral precepts as a way of controlling the wayward instincts. The actualist is concerned to bring about the always existing peace-on-earth in himself/herself and for others through eradication and extirpation of the rudimentary animal instincts with their corresponding sense of ‘being’, whereas the spiritualist merely substitutes ‘Being’ for ‘being’ in a self-aggrandizing grab for the Glory of Enlightenment. No wonder spiritual people remain so violent and arrogant. Gary to Vineeto

Recently you wrote something in response to No 60. To reproduce the context, here is what you wrote:

No 60 wrote: The preliminary method is simplicity itself, and it works pretty well.

I don’t see how you could say that ‘ignore everything that isn’t actual’ is good advice.

It seems to me that persistent, unremitting attentiveness to one’s identity in action is the hallmark of the actualism method. This is quite in contrast to ignoring one’s feelings and emotions. Ignoring one’s identity, both ‘who’ I think I am in my head and ‘who’ I feel I am in my heart, can only produce dissociation and delusion. This is the opposite of attentiveness. In attentiveness, one is heedful, alert, and intent on observing exactly what is happening in one’s inner reality. Attentiveness does not shrink from or avoid what is going on.

So instead of saying to ignore one’s inner reality, I think the actualism method is to persistently attend to one’s feelings, thoughts, emotional reactions, affectations, and imaginings. I only say this because it has been my experience that ignoring what is going on in my head and/or in my heart, while that may be comforting and provide momentary relief from whatever is troubling me, has only led to more of the same. Whereas persistently digging into, being aware of, and practicing unremitting attentiveness is what eventually whittles away at the feelings that prevent one from being happy and harmless, and leads ultimately to apperception.

I would maintain that ignoring both what is going on in the world around one as well as in one’s inner world at the core of one’s being is a stick-your-head-in the-sand approach. It would be of enormous appeal to a spiritualist but not to a practising actualist. Gary to No 38

I think I finally understand that feelings are a different mechanism and happen before thought.

So far I had been under the impression that every feeling has to be mediated by thought: IOW thought is the only mechanism by which feelings are triggered; which is the eastern viewpoint: thoughts create feelings.

Though I had bought the explanation in actualist writings that feelings are independent (though interwoven) with thoughts (this difference is important to actualism) which is consistent with LeDoux’s findings, this is the first time I have experientially understood and dropped my viewpoint that thought is the mechanism for feelings.

It is true that thought can trigger feelings; but feelings happen before thought. This I noticed when I had a jealousy reaction and the thought came afterwards explaining it. The thought fills in the gap of this ghost process of feelings and takes all the focus. So one ends up blaming thought.

So I now view feelings as a ‘black box’ mechanism of invisible, instantaneous response to stimuli (including internal stimuli such as thought) in the presence of which thought is subservient to the feeling’s goals. In other words, thought is shackled by feelings.

I just wrote down my understanding to open it for feedback and criticism. No 33

This is how I handled similar questions in my own experience – I have known that I have been investigating ‘incorrectly’ retrospectively a lot of the times... but I have come to senses seeing how a feeling operates repetitively – how it operates locally blocking the sensible questioning – how it strengthens beliefs that block investigation – how it really doesn’t want to end in spite of its painful reality – how it is hypocritical in the sense that whilst projecting as if it wants happiness, how it wants/works for the opposite etc.

I asked myself: what is the feeling behind the question?

If I think about a hypothetical situation and fear it so badly, I look at the fear behind it and see how fear works in clinging to anything and doesn’t let it go – in spite of the thinking and common sense one tries to inject – making it a big issue whilst growing in intensity and wandering without giving a focus... I ask myself how many times have I done this before... I try to see how similar feelings have paralyzed me in the past... I try to see if it has any obvious bearing on how I grew up... I ask myself if I am truly interested in solving the impasse or I just create impasses for ‘my’ survival – as in continuing to the feel that way forever instead of solving the problem and moving on to feel happy & harmless?

Such questioning has helped me in dissolving these imaginary walls... as with operation of common sense and attentiveness, I have seen such feelings weakening and letting more of common sense and attentiveness to work... as if building a positive feedback cycle… more and more energy becoming available for sane functioning and having fun. No 33 to No 48

I have noticed a tendency in me to keep the feelings as indescribable, unknown – by objecting to any attempt of penetration. Various doubts arise when trying to identify and recognize. It seems to be difficult to clearly identify and come up with a taxonomy of the ‘inside world’ – though with practice of actualism I am able to find out and eradicate the impediments to understanding. Such level of doubts (as in a fearful feeling where one questions but doesn’t constructively try to answer) is surely not the standard I set in other fields of practical functioning (colours for instance, I don’t go on endlessly questioning whether I understand them, are they nameable, what is the denotation of ‘red’, is there something called ‘red’ or is it my interpretation – but such questions block me from forming a good understanding of emotions). Why is it that I am more interested in questioning than answering?

Why do I want to keep things so vague and avoid concluding? Why is there always this threat of falling back in confusion? (Of course, as I am raising these questions I am modifying my behaviour – so your answers may end up being obsolete J ). Is this the mechanism by which the feeler keeps the thinker (or the common sense) in dark and in control? Has this been the experience for others and have they solved it?

I can see that not to be with such doubt does not translate to mindless accepting. It leads to consideration of the case and exploring the possibility. No 33

I have noticed a tendency in me to keep the feelings as indescribable, unknown – by objecting to any attempt of penetration. Various doubts arise when trying to identify and recognize. It seems to be difficult to clearly identify and come up with a taxonomy of the ‘inside world’ – though with practice of actualism I am able to find out and eradicate the impediments to understanding.

Such level of doubts (as in a fearful feeling where one questions but doesn’t constructively try to answer) is surely not the standard I set in other fields of practical functioning (colours for instance, I don’t go on endlessly questioning whether I understand them, are they nameable, what is the denotation of ‘red’, is there something called ‘red’ or is it my interpretation – but such questions block me from forming a good understanding of emotions). Why is it that I am more interested in questioning than answering?

Why do I want to keep things so vague and avoid concluding? Why is there always this threat of falling back in confusion? (Of course, as I am raising these questions I am modifying my behaviour – so your answers may end up being obsolete J ). Is this the mechanism by which the feeler keeps the thinker (or the common sense) in dark and in control? Has this been the experience for others and have they solved it?

I can see that not to be with such doubt does not translate to mindless accepting. It leads to consideration of the case and exploring the possibility. No 33

That is why I say it vital to make the differentiation for oneself between what is a fact and what is a belief, and by extension, an opinion. If decisions are made on the basis of emotion, as they frequently are, it begets more of the same confusion.

Decisions made with emotion are not intelligent, despite what many think and write about the ‘intelligence’ of emotions.

I would think that if you are sincere about wanting to learn about Actualism you would want to investigate your emotions, including any ‘feelings of nurturance’ towards anyone, Iraqis included. Everything you have said would be fertile grounds for your ‘self’-investigations.

Incidentally, I would recommend that you read under the term ‘Innocence’ in the AF writings. Innocence is something entirely new in human affairs.

I am not sure why you would want to discount your feelings. Feelings and emotions are a potent source of information about the Human Condition. Any sympathy, nurturance, feelings of affection, affiliation, compassion, empathy, etc, of any kind, again – towards anyone, can be fertile ground for investigation. I sincerely recommend to you investigating the tender passion of nurturance as well as the so-called negative feelings.

As with the tender passions, so-called negative emotions of resentment and anger need to be thoroughly examined with the end aim of eliminating malice and sorrow. My own personal experience is that I was filled with feelings of resentment towards authority from a very early age. My question for you would be: is there any difference between the resentment that you feel for the powers-that-be and the resentment that propels human beings to war and destruction?

I don’t know what to make of that, other than to say that every human being experiences resentment and anger and not always for the same reasons. I would think that since you are evidently experiencing strong resentment that it would be relatively easy to uncover the malice behind such feelings.

If one justifies their resentment, and by extension their malice, by resentfully focusing on what someone else has done or said, nothing is to be gained. But if you would like to rid yourself of your malice and sorrow, and I don’t really know if that is what you are doing, then every trace of resentment no matter how slight will need to be looked into. It does no good in my experience to justify resentment by pointing at the actions of others.

*

As you said, ‘international law will not prevent rogue nations from taking it on themselves to violate the rights of other nations.’ International law enforcement could have an effect. As with criminals in our communities, we want laws and police forces to keep them in check as much as possible. And we want the police to be governed by rules of law and fair conduct.

Also keep in mind that some of the most law-bound societies are also the most dangerous societies to live in, and the most likely to suppress individual freedoms, such as the right to assemble and speak one’s mind plainly…

Well, now we need to define what law is. I’m talking about laws that guarantee freedom, protection and fairness, not laws that allow for the opposites. I’m assuming that law will protect individual freedom as much as possible and that law will be flexible to adapt to changing circumstances. Repressive laws are another issue. Doesn’t the underlying peace in this universe peek out from time to time within human affairs.

‘I’, and my precious feelings, are the only thing that is preventing the underlying peace and harmony of this infinite universe to be actualized in this flesh-and-blood body. As ‘I’ am my feelings, and my feelings are ‘me’, ‘I’ am literally standing in the way of peace on earth. There is no difference between my resentments and ‘me’. I am literally my resentments, in those terms.

But speaking more personally, what I have done, like the other dedicated Actualists on this list, is to turn the emotional energy of the feelings and emotions that prevented and spoiled the purity and pristineness of actuality into a burning passion to be free from the Human Condition. This has always been an exciting adventure, never a dull moment.

I’m saying that some progress has been made over the centuries in spite of the instinctual passions and that supporting such progress is a useful activity.

Oh yes, progress has been made alright. If you have not already noticed, mankind’s wars are more destructive, more numerous, and in spite of all the progress, people are still being raped, tortured, sodomized, etc, etc., on ad infinitum. The Human Condition is rotten to the core. Gary to No 49

Actualism Homepage

Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless

Web page designed by The Actual Freedom Trust