GENIUS FORUMS

Cold Cave wrote: I've noticed the geniuses highly regarded in this forum (Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Jesus, Weininger) all seemed to suffer from deep despair, at least for a time.

Now I don't regard myself as a genius, but I struggle with despair. I would describe it as a kind of existential despair, coupled with the loneliness of one who values truth and wisdom.

Do enlightened sages ever need a shoulder to cry on?

Is the desire for human touch an irrational emotional attachment to the world?

Cold Cave wrote:Hello again


To those that have struggled with existential despair or loneliness, how have you been able to overcome it?

ardy wrote: The only way out of despair is action.

ardy wrote: Dragging a sad brain around with you is not helpful to either you or anyone else you meet.

Cory Duchesne wrote: It also helps to plan your life all the way to the end. Find a place to live that's convenient and commit yourself to a vision.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:

ardy wrote: The only way out of despair is action.

Great example of classic ignorance.

I thought about it for 2 seconds, it sounded good to me, it was written, and thus it is absolute.

Cheers to those who *don't* get sick of reading people do this for every topic, everywhere.

Some advice ardy, stop clinging to all those beliefs, some which can be so subtle or common to you that you won't recognize they are even beliefs.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:You'll have to elaborate on "Guna" and "Tamas" for me.

Cold Cave wrote:Hello again

I've noticed the geniuses highly regarded in this forum (Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Jesus, Weininger) all seemed to suffer from deep despair, at least for a time.

Now I don't regard myself as a genius, but I struggle with despair. I would describe it as a kind of existential despair, coupled with the loneliness of one who values truth and wisdom.

To those that have struggled with existential despair or loneliness, how have you been able to overcome it? Or is this something that just comes with the territory of being truthful?
At what point would you recommend someone see a therapist, or consider medication?
Do enlightened sages ever need a shoulder to cry on?
Is the desire for human touch an irrational emotional attachment to the world?

Loneliness — aloneness

When you come to have faith in your rational mind, knowing your own reasoning to be valid — despite the mindless and irrational attempts of others to convince you that reason is dubious (those being, of course, the ignore-worthy and laughable attempts to prove reasoning is dubious) — you are alone, more than ever.

The would-be thinker, the budding sage, is well-adapted to solitude. It is his natural psychological and 'social' environment. Thinking comes easiest and clearest when alone; for that matter, it only happens by one's own thought, so by necessity it comes alone. But the consequences of expressing one's thoughts — that is another matter.

Let me distinguish what is meant by loneliness for clarity's sake, so to overcome this obstacle. The point of discussing loneliness in a work on the will to consciousness and being courageous, is to destroy obstacles to wisdom. As this loneliness is a subtle delusion, in that sense, it is an obstacle. But there is more to it than that, because it is a major psychological obstacle that, if allowed to continue, will surely develop validity in the thinker's mind, whence it will fester into an ugly and deep-rooted cancer which works against directly and virulently against self-overcoming. It is so important to address this, that there will be several more exercises on the nature of demoralisation and spiritual apathy.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

1. Animal loneliness. The first basic clarification is that it is not animal immediacy's loneliness.

Desiring to socialise; to have friends to while away a seemingly endless period of boredom; to find an interesting distraction in what the 'others' are doing; to distance oneself from one's uncomfortable emotions or twinges of a bad conscience by finding others who are worse off (and then one can return to one's own discomfort, feeling that it is quite bearable, and therefore, one can gloatingly remain apathetic about the issue); to find a like-minded companion to thrash out an interesting idea, or find alternative solutions, or seek their approval and authorisation; or pursue sexually gratifying feelings with a tempting fling, or other forms of emotional games of domination and submission to boost your self-esteem and ego: these are some of the dalliances of the loneliness of animal immediacy. These form a genuine type of loneliness, but it is not the loneliness one experiences on having a self, on being an individual, on valuing thought. This is not the kind of loneliness that the thinker must overcome, since he has already overcome it.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

2. Natural loneliness. The second basic clarification is that it is not the simple desire for solitude typical of the thinker.

The solitary thinker doesn't by nature desire to be alone, but rather values the experience of good thinking and clear understanding, which just happens to require solitude. Being alone happens to be typical, but the thinker doesn't seek to be alone: the loneliness of seeking an absence of company. He seeks, instead, reason: good thinking and clear understanding.

If he experiences too much unreason in himself, he experiences that loneliness, so one can easily see that it is not a loneliness of being isolated from others. It is a loneliness of missing the company of good thinking.

In the company of people behaving and speaking thoughtlessly and foolishly, this loneliness makes itself strongly felt, because it is harder to remedy. But again, it is the absence of these persons' folly and not the absence of the persons themselves, that the thinker desires. One is not so much seeking to be alone, as for these wretched, impoverished, derelict folk to know the good company, the good friendship, of reason. One misses the company of reason for their sake (which is, for the sake of reason.)

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

3. Involuntary loneliness.

But now, the possibility arises for aloneness, or spiritual individuality. It is in only in their company, the company of the ignorant, and only once they learn his desire for their good, and only once they attack him for such a noble wish, that the opportunity appears to climb towards aloneness.

An involuntary loneliness arises on learning how laborious and long-winded is the process of dragging others up to a level where candid, genuine communication can occur. It is still coming from the egotistical need for safety in numbers, from desiring wise companions, from knowing there is nothing more he or his society can do, to fill his emotional need for reprieve from the ongoing strain of educating the others. The wish for understanding when it is not available from anyone on earth, is an irrational desire for consolation, since it speaks of some degree of hatred of Reality. But experiencing involuntary loneliness provides an opportunity to climb towards aloneness: a purified mind where one accepts Reality in all its forms, seeing the core truth and not distracted by the forms it takes, let alone the benefits or disadvantages of those forms.

It is difficult to transcend the solitary's reluctant but resigned acknowledgment that there are very few people who can understand him, no matter how hard he tries to edify and instruct. However, who could he turn to? Who could console? Ultimately, only enlightenment resolves and undermines the suffering of involuntary loneliness; thus, the solitary recognises the folly of looking for a human, earthly, finite confidant.

Kelly Jones wrote:

Cold Cave wrote:Hello again

I've noticed the geniuses highly regarded in this forum (Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Jesus, Weininger) all seemed to suffer from deep despair, at least for a time.

Now I don't regard myself as a genius, but I struggle with despair. I would describe it as a kind of existential despair, coupled with the loneliness of one who values truth and wisdom.

To those that have struggled with existential despair or loneliness, how have you been able to overcome it? Or is this something that just comes with the territory of being truthful?
At what point would you recommend someone see a therapist, or consider medication?
Do enlightened sages ever need a shoulder to cry on?
Is the desire for human touch an irrational emotional attachment to the world?

Existential despair belongs to the unenlightened, who don't recognise that the finite self is not really there. They continue to struggle and strive over themselves, trying to grasp and conquer some aspect of self, when it is essentially not graspable at all. That is what they agonise over.

For those who've seen the true nature of self, loneliness comes from not being enlightened enough. They still want safety in the crowd. They believe in that world of personal advantage. It takes time to deal with this deep egotistical hang-over. Being enlightened essentially involves sacrifice and renunciation: so it takes time to make these deep psychological changes.

The only advantage from seeing a therapist or medication, is to spurn one away from such methods. Their advice is basically to give solace to the ego; but it can be mainstream psychotherapy is the only solution for some. Eventually, if your motive from seeking their help is pure, you'll realise how regressive their intentions are, and the sooner you abandon their help, the better.

I wrote about loneliness vs. aloneness a few days ago, as I'm working on part two of "100 Seaside Nights", titled "100 Isolations of Will". This is the extract:

Loneliness — aloneness

When you come to have faith in your rational mind, knowing your own reasoning to be valid — despite the mindless and irrational attempts of others to convince you that reason is dubious (those being, of course, the ignore-worthy and laughable attempts to prove reasoning is dubious) — you are alone, more than ever.

The would-be thinker, the budding sage, is well-adapted to solitude. It is his natural psychological and 'social' environment. Thinking comes easiest and clearest when alone; for that matter, it only happens by one's own thought, so by necessity it comes alone. But the consequences of expressing one's thoughts — that is another matter.

Let me distinguish what is meant by loneliness for clarity's sake, so to overcome this obstacle. The point of discussing loneliness in a work on the will to consciousness and being courageous, is to destroy obstacles to wisdom. As this loneliness is a subtle delusion, in that sense, it is an obstacle. But there is more to it than that, because it is a major psychological obstacle that, if allowed to continue, will surely develop validity in the thinker's mind, whence it will fester into an ugly and deep-rooted cancer which works against directly and virulently against self-overcoming. It is so important to address this, that there will be several more exercises on the nature of demoralisation and spiritual apathy.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

1. Animal loneliness. The first basic clarification is that it is not animal immediacy's loneliness.

Desiring to socialise; to have friends to while away a seemingly endless period of boredom; to find an interesting distraction in what the 'others' are doing; to distance oneself from one's uncomfortable emotions or twinges of a bad conscience by finding others who are worse off (and then one can return to one's own discomfort, feeling that it is quite bearable, and therefore, one can gloatingly remain apathetic about the issue); to find a like-minded companion to thrash out an interesting idea, or find alternative solutions, or seek their approval and authorisation; or pursue sexually gratifying feelings with a tempting fling, or other forms of emotional games of domination and submission to boost your self-esteem and ego: these are some of the dalliances of the loneliness of animal immediacy. These form a genuine type of loneliness, but it is not the loneliness one experiences on having a self, on being an individual, on valuing thought. This is not the kind of loneliness that the thinker must overcome, since he has already overcome it.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

2. Natural loneliness. The second basic clarification is that it is not the simple desire for solitude typical of the thinker.

The solitary thinker doesn't by nature desire to be alone, but rather values the experience of good thinking and clear understanding, which just happens to require solitude. Being alone happens to be typical, but the thinker doesn't seek to be alone: the loneliness of seeking an absence of company. He seeks, instead, reason: good thinking and clear understanding.

If he experiences too much unreason in himself, he experiences that loneliness, so one can easily see that it is not a loneliness of being isolated from others. It is a loneliness of missing the company of good thinking.

In the company of people behaving and speaking thoughtlessly and foolishly, this loneliness makes itself strongly felt, because it is harder to remedy. But again, it is the absence of these persons' folly and not the absence of the persons themselves, that the thinker desires. One is not so much seeking to be alone, as for these wretched, impoverished, derelict folk to know the good company, the good friendship, of reason. One misses the company of reason for their sake (which is, for the sake of reason.)

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

3. Involuntary loneliness.

But now, the possibility arises for aloneness, or spiritual individuality. It is in only in their company, the company of the ignorant, and only once they learn his desire for their good, and only once they attack him for such a noble wish, that the opportunity appears to climb towards aloneness.

An involuntary loneliness arises on learning how laborious and long-winded is the process of dragging others up to a level where candid, genuine communication can occur. It is still coming from the egotistical need for safety in numbers, from desiring wise companions, from knowing there is nothing more he or his society can do, to fill his emotional need for reprieve from the ongoing strain of educating the others. The wish for understanding when it is not available from anyone on earth, is an irrational desire for consolation, since it speaks of some degree of hatred of Reality. But experiencing involuntary loneliness provides an opportunity to climb towards aloneness: a purified mind where one accepts Reality in all its forms, seeing the core truth and not distracted by the forms it takes, let alone the benefits or disadvantages of those forms.

It is difficult to transcend the solitary's reluctant but resigned acknowledgment that there are very few people who can understand him, no matter how hard he tries to edify and instruct. However, who could he turn to? Who could console? Ultimately, only enlightenment resolves and undermines the suffering of involuntary loneliness; thus, the solitary recognises the folly of looking for a human, earthly, finite confidant.