The Personality Types of Political Persuasion

Seduction in any form is a psychological process that transcends gender, except in a few key areas where each gender has its own weakness. The male is traditionally more susceptible to appearances, where his carnal interests are concerned, but the primary sense that he interprets reality with plays large role in his closer relationships. Hence, women who can concoct the right physical appearance appeal to large numbers of men, but don’t succeed as much in the political area as in the business world. Conversely, the weakness of the female gender itself is language. The right words must be spoken at the right moment in order to give the desired impression to her audience. Though, the majority will not be drawn to a male speaker, who is the same height or shorter.

Personality Types of Leaders

No matter, where in the world we find ourselves, we are always confronted by the same various categories of leaders. While we have Stalin, Hilter and Mussolini on one side, we have Churchill, Sissi and Lincon on the other. Our state, religious and banking systems have become the central pillars of control, which govern our society at almost every step…and who would not be drawn to holding such power, am I right?

Unfortunately, the fittest to lead often do not wish to, as those drawn to power will do anything to climb the social ladder. When this power thrust upon suitable people, such as Sissi of Bayern, they use it for the betterment of the country as well as its allegiances. In case of Sissi, her marriage to King Franz was an unhappy coincidence for the Queen Mother, which nearly led to the breakdown of Austro-Hungarian relations, further rebellion or even war. Despite her repeated attempts to sow discord between the two nations, Sissi made every possible effort to rectify them. Her desire to free the Hungarian people with the support of the leader of the rebels, Julian Andrej, was not a popular choice for the old monarchs. Yet, her charm was so intense, Austria was not the only country to embrace her ascension with great joy. The Hungarian people fell in love with her during her struggle against its oppressors and anointed her empress. Her unwillingness to bow down to social etiquette may have endeared her to the average person around the world, but caused problems in her marriage…especially after the Queen Mother removed her first-born from her care with the permission of the King, which was the standard protocol for royals, she fought for the right to raise her own child and won.

The Rakish Leader

An ideal leader combines riotous living with intellectual pursuits, designed to change society for the better. They place the will of the people before their personal desires, regardless of the sacrifice. However, this personality type of the aristocratic rake also has its counterpart. Whereas one uses his power to sway a captive audience in the attempt to improve their lives, the other uses it for his own ends. Both possess the ability to let themselves go in order to enchant people in their own way. Both aim to draw their target(s) into the kind of moment in which past and future lose meaning. To do so, they must both be able to abandon themselves in the moment to become one with those they wish to persuade.

Their success lies in the unconscious content that they bring to the surface. They appeal to the fantasy of the individual in a large crowd with cunning. They plan what specific fantasies, they wish to appeal to. They calculate what they would have to persuade people in a particular direction. However, they take great caution to mask their underlying motivations. Merely the scent of unsavory intentions makes an audience grow defensive, thereby lowering their chance of success.

The more ardent leaders solve this dilemma in the most artful
manners. They must think harder to find a way around whatever the obstacle is. It is exhausting work. However, by nature, such a leader has the advantage of an uncontrollable passion. When they pursues a goal, their strong emotions persuade as much as inspire. As a result, people support them, even despite themselves. When they play on emotions, they are so convincing that they will face any obstacle for the mere sake of pesuasion. After all, their followers would not expect to feel secure in desperate times. Even when the public is aware of their immoral past, there is nothing more attractive than a reformed sinner. It lulls them into a false sense of security, in which they believe to know their weaknesses. It makes them more relatable…and as such they inspire no fear. In the absence of doing so, their intense desire for a specific kind of change has a distracting power.

When they play on intellect, their efforts are often more sophisticated. They use attention less as a weapon to captivate but to enlighten. They inspire a level of confidence that leaves no room for doubt. They show no hesitation and abandon all restraint.

The Dandy Leader

Most of us feel trapped within the limited roles that the world expects us to play. We are instantly attracted to those who are not…Those who move through the world more fluidly, more ambiguously than we do. In other words, we admire who create their own persona. They excite us because they cannot be labelled. Their air of freedom is one we want for ourselves. They play with masculinity and femininity in an androgynous fashion.

This type has a strong personality with a tendency to unbury the hidden wants of their audience…and what is most seductive is often what is most repressed. They approach such forbidden content in the minds of their followers gradually with a level of playfulness. They act as a magnet for people’s dark, unrealized yearnings.

Since the 1920s, women were beginning to play with a newly found freedom. Instead of waiting for change, they wanted to be able to initiate it. For wives, this time also marked a change in the way they view gender roles as well as the family unit. However, their rise to political power often came at the cost of motherhood. The average woman enjoyed more control in initiating intimate encounters, but they still wanted the man to end up sweeping them off their feet.

Many of us today imagine that freedom has progressed in recent years. Everything has changed for the better. This is mostly an illusion. A reading of history reveals periods of freedom almost in glorious excess of what we are currently experiencing. Gender roles are certainly changing, but they have changed before. Society is in a state of constant flux, but there is something that hasnt changed. The vast majority of people conform to whatever is normal for the age. They play the role allotted to them. Conformity is a constant force because humans are social creatures who are always imitating one another.

At certain points in history it may be fashionable to be different and rebellious, but if a lot of people are adopting this role, there is nothing different or rebellious about it. Such widespred anarchy would either create a dystopian or utopian society.
Leaders rarely complain about most people’s slavish conformity, however, for it offers untold possibilities of power and seduction to those who are up for a few risks.

Since most of us are secretly oppressed by our lack of freedom, we are drawn to those who are more fluid and flaunt their difference. As alphas, groups tend to form around them and wildly imitate their style. In ideal cases, they are different in ways, which are both striking and aesthetic, never vulgar. They poke fun at current trends, while carving their own path. Not to mention, they are supremely uninterested in what anyone else is doing. Most people are so insecure, they wonder what these outsiders are up to. Potential followers slowly come to admire or imitate them, simply because they express themselves with total confidence. More importantly, they are subtle in all their attempts to persuade. They never try too hard for attention, but wait until it comes to them. Moreover, what distinguishes them from the norm is equally as subtle, expressed in little touches to highlight their disdain for convention.

The Naturally Persuasive Leader

Naturals are people who somehow avoided getting certain childish traits drummed out of them by adult experience. These people can be as powerfully persuasive as any child, as it seems uncanny at first glance that they have preserved such marvelous qualities. The spirit, they have retained, while so many others have not. However, this youthfulness is not something beyond their control. They learn the value of retaining a particular qualities to get what they want early on…and the seductive power it contains. Over years, they build upon those traits, they managed to preserve. To do this successfully, they have to learn to be witty to a degree without self-consciouss, since there is nothing less natural than seeming hesitant.

As people are we much more forgiving of those who go all the way, though they seem uncontrollably foolish, than the halfhearted adult with a childish streak. In a position of leadership, a touch of innocence can help lower defenses. For example, like when a con man plays dumb to make the other person trust him and feel superior. This kind of feigned naturalness has countless applications in daily life, where nothing is more dangerous than looking smarter than the next person. Conversely, in politics, the perfect way to disguise ones cleverness means the opponent is perhaps a better choice, unless the trap has already been set for the opposition to reveal their ignorance. In the case of Jess Phillip latest stand in British parliament, for instance, she demonstrated if you are uncontrollably childish and cannot turn it off, you run the risk of seeming pathetic, earning not sympathy but pity or disgust from your listeners.

On a related note, these natural traits evolve with age. Childlike qualities work best in one who is still young enough for them to seem natural. They are much harder for an older person to pull off. The Duke of Buckingham, who seduced everyone in the English court in the 1620s (including the homosexual King James I himself), was wondrously childish. His behaviour, however, became obnoxious and off-putting as he grew older. Worse, he eventually made enough enemies that he ended up being murdered. As people age, their natural qualities should suggest more the child’s open spirit, less an innocence that will no longer convince anyone.

The Coquette Leader

The ability to delay satisfaction is the ultimate art of seduction. This tactic can also be applied in the annals of political persuasion, but with less public appreciation than the others.

Coquettes are the grand masters of the back-and-forth movement between hope and frustration. They bait with the promise of reward [the hope of positive change], which will prove elusive. Yet, this only makes their followers pursue them the more to make the desired change happen or point out their flakishness. Their in-built narcissism may prove devilishly attractive in the dating world, but it loses its charm when they assume a leadership role. Their strategy is never to offer what their followers desire the most, yet always make it appear as though they might. Absence makes the heart grow fonder, like they say.

They tend to play with volatile emotions. Every time the pendulum swings, love shifts to hate, so they must orchestrate everything carefully. Their absences cannot be too long, their bouts of anger must be quickly followed by smiles. They keep their victims emotionally entrapped for a long time. Although the longer this goes on, the more tiresome this dynamic begins to prove tiresome.

The Charmer

These consummate manipulators mask their cleverness by creating an atmosphere of trust. Their method is too simple. They just deflect attention from themselves and focus it on their target. They understand their spirit, feel their pain, adapt to their moods. They make others feel better about themselves. As a rule, they do not argue, fight, complain or pester, unless pushed beyond the point. The more they listen to concerns and feign empathy, they foster a state of dependency while their power grows. To be precise, they aim at peoples primary weaknesses, their vanity and self-esteem. Their way to attain power is to fulfill the expectations of their audience, such as the focused attention, the boosted self-esteem, the needed support, the understanding (real or illusory), but subtract any meaningful change.

However, in some lurks the capacity for true leadership beneath the surface. They may give people something that holds their attention or fascinates them. A decent leader will capture people’s attention without lowering their powers of reason, but heighten them. A manipulative leader will strike at the things their audience has the least control over, like ego, vanity and self-esteem. The strategy can never be obvious. Subtlety is once again the Charmers greatest asset. If the target is to be kept from seeing through the their efforts or growing suspicious, maybe even tiring of excessive attention. The Charmer is like a beam of light that doesn’t play directly on a target but throws a pleasantly diffused glow over it. They fade into the background, as listen and observe. They let others do the talking and thereby revealing themselves in the process. As they find out more, especially their strengths or more importantly their weaknesses, they tailor their attention to specific wants, needs and insecurities. By adapting to them, they empathise with their woes, validating their sense of self-worth.

On a mass level, they make gestures of self-sacrifice (no matter how fake) to show the public that they share their pain and are working in their interest. They listen to complaints, but primarily distract from the problems instead of solving them.
In politics, they provide illusion and myth rather than reality. Instead of asking people to sacrifice for the greater good, they talk of grand moral issues. An appeal that makes people feel good will translate into following, votes and power.

In essence, they superficially turn antagonism into harmony. They know how to smooth out conflict wigout ever having to dirty their hands at solving it. Yet, they are often the first retreat in the face of aggression and relinquish small victories that they can turn sour through their influence. Yielding or indulgence can only charm the fight out of potential enemies for a limited time. They never criticize people overtly to avoid making people insecure and resistant to change. So, they plant ideas, insinuate suggestions etc., while they amass power without people noticing. They lull their audience into ease. The more relaxed they become, the easier it is to bend them to their will. Some borrow an old NLP technique, know as mirroring. They adapt to their moods, posture as well as general body language. People are prone to narcissism, so they are drawn to those most similar to themselves. Those who share their values, tastes, opinions etc. This works particularly well if they are an outsider by showing that they share the values of their adopted group or country, which is also an old war custom.

The true masters this art show deep calm in the face of adversity. Their unruffled exterior puts people at ease. They seem patient, as if waiting for destiny to deal them a better card. If done subtly, their ability to enhance the lives of others will be devilishly clever. Their social skills prove important here by creating a wide network of allies that’ll give them the power to link people up with each other, which will make them feel that by knowing you they can make their lives easier. This is something no one can resist. Follow-through is key though. So many people will charm by promising a person great things, but do not follow through. Anyone can make a promise. What sets a real charmer apart is following up their promises with definite actions.

Our personalities are often molded by how we are treated. When a parent or spouse is defensive or argumentative in dealing with us, we tend to respond the same way. We respond in kind…But, never mistake peoples exterior characteristics for reality, for the character we show on the surface is merely a reflection of the people with whom they have been most in contact, or a front disguising its own opposite. Our identity is the the result of the combined effort of everyone we have ever known.
A rough exterior may hide a person dying for warmth…a repressed, sober-looking type may actually be struggling to conceal uncontrollable emotions. That is the key to charm, feeding what has been repressed or denied.
We often recognize Charmers as such. We sense their innate cleverness and in so doing we fall under their spell. The feeling that they provide is so rare as to be worth the price we pay…ot so it seems. The world is full of self-absorbed people. In their presence, we know that everything in our relationship with them is directed toward them (their insecurities, their neediness, their hunger for attention etc.). This reinforces our own egocentric tendencies, so we protectively tense up. It is a syndrome that only makes us the more susceptible to the charm of the those who don’t. First, they don’t talk much about themselves, which heightens their mystery and disguises their limitations. Second, they seem to be attentive and their interest is so delightfully focused that we relax and open up. Last but not least, Charmers are pleasant to be around. Their self-effacing attentiveness makes them a pleasure to be around…However, only from afar or for a limited time. Nobody can maintain such a persona indefinitely. No matter how addicted we might become to someones devilish charm, eventually this attraction fades as a result of the inevitable. It is impossible to contain all kinds of negative emotions forever.
Conversely, in a social setting, they can maintain their facade indefinitely, when done correctly. People tire of beauty without social grace, but they never tire of having their self-worth validated. The difficulty of this exercise is to deal with high maintenance people as though it takes no effort. Of course, there will always be difficult people (for instance, the chronically insecure, the hopelessly stubborn, the hysterical complainers). The ability to lower the defences caused by these problems becomes essential for them. They prove an invaluable skilln but they have to be careful. If they are too passive, people will run all over them and take advantage. If too assertive, they will highlight their unattractive qualities even more. However, when a level of balance is maintained, they are outwardly gracious. Inwardly,they calculate and wait…as their strategy is temporary surrender. When the time comes, and it inevitably will, the tables will turn. The targets emotions will land them in trouble eventually, allowing superiority to be regained.

The Charismatic

Today, anyone who has presence, attracts attention. They have an unusual confidence. They express a vision. We may not realize it, but in their presence we have a kind of spiritual experience. We believe in these people, without having any rational evidence for doing so. To them, it comes completely naturally, as if it came from something mysteriously beyond their control.

In our rational, disenchanting world, people crave otherworldly experience, particularly on a shared level. Any sign of charisma plays into this innate desire to believe in something beyond the physical…and there is nothing more seductive than giving people something to believe in and follow. Such leaders typically pick a cause, an ideal, a vision and show that they will not sway from their goal. From that moment on, as long as people believe they have a plan, that they know where they are going, they will follow instinctively. The direction does not even matter. As long as they project confidence that they either believe or make others believe comes from something real.

Since most people hesitate before taking any bold action (even when action is what is required), single-minded focus to act tends to draw attention. People believe in them through the simple force of their character.

Our personalities are often molded by how we are treated. When a parent or spouse is defensive or argumentative in dealing with us, we tend to respond the same way. We respond in kind…But, never mistake peoples exterior characteristics for reality, for the character we show on the surface is merely a reflection of the people with whom they have been most in contact, or a front disguising its own opposite. Our identity is the the result of the combined effort of everyone we have ever known.

A rough exterior may hide a person dying for warmth…a repressed, sober-looking type may actually be struggling to conceal uncontrollable emotions. That is the key to charm, feeding what has been repressed or denied.

We often recognize Charmers as such. We sense their innate cleverness and in so doing we fall under their spell. The feeling that they provide is so rare as to be worth the price we pay…ot so it seems. The world is full of self-absorbed people. In their presence, we know that everything in our relationship with them is directed toward them (their insecurities, their neediness, their hunger for attention etc.). This reinforces our own egocentric tendencies, so we protectively tense up. It is a syndrome that only makes us the more susceptible to the charm of the those who don’t. First, they don’t talk much about themselves, which heightens their mystery and disguises their limitations. Second, they seem to be attentive and their interest is so delightfully focused that we relax and open up. Last but not least, Charmers are pleasant to be around. Their self-effacing attentiveness makes them a pleasure to be around…However, only from afar or for a limited time. Nobody can maintain such a persona indefinitely. No matter how addicted we might become to someones devilish charm, eventually this attraction fades as a result of the inevitable. It is impossible to contain all kinds of negative emotions forever.

Conversely, in a social setting, they can maintain their facade indefinitely, when done correctly. People tire of beauty without social grace, but they never tire of having their self-worth validated.

The difficulty of this exercise is to deal with high maintenance people as though it takes no effort. Of course, there will always be difficult people (for instance, the chronically insecure, the hopelessly stubborn, the hysterical complainers). The ability to lower the defences caused by these problems becomes essential for them. They prove an invaluable skilln but they have to be careful. If they are too passive, people will run all over them and take advantage. If too assertive, they will highlight their unattractive qualities even more. However, when a level of balance is maintained, they are outwardly gracious.

Seduction and charm are the most effective counterweapons. Outwardly, be gracious. Adapt to their every mood. Enter their spirit. Inwardly, calculate and wait: your surrender is a strategy, not a way of life. When the time comes, and it inevitably will, the tables will turn. Their aggression will land them in trouble, and that will put you in a position to rescue them, regaining superiority. (You could also decide that you had had enough, and consign them to oblivion.) Your charm has prevented them from foreseeing this or growing suspicious. A whole revolution can be enacted without a single act of violence, simply by waiting for the apple to ripen and fall.

Today, anyone who has presence, who attracts attention when he or she enters a room, is said to possess charisma. But even these less-exalted types reveal a trace of the quality suggested by the word’s original meaning. Their charisma is mysterious and inexplicable, never obvious. They have an unusual confidence. They have a gift—often a smoothness with language-that makes them stand out from the crowd. They express a vision. We may not realize it, but in their presence we have a kind of religious experience: we believe in these people, without having any rational evidence for doing so. When trying to Concoct an effect of charisma, never forget the religious source of its power. You must radiate an inward quality that has a saintly or spiritual edge to it. Your eyes must glow with the fire of a prophet. Your charisma must seem natural, as if it came from something mysteriously beyond your control, a gift of the gods. In our rational, disenchanted world, people crave a religious experience, particularly on a group level. Any sign of charisma plays to this desire to believe in something. And there is nothing more seductive than giving people something to believe in and follow.

Charisma must seem mystical, but that does not mean you cannot learn certain tricks that will enhance the charisma you already possess, or will give you the outward appearance of it. The following are basic qualities that will help create the illusion of charisma:

Such leaders typically pick a cause, an ideal, a vision and show that they will not sway from their goal. From that moment on, as long as people believe they have a plan, that they know where they are going, they will follow instinctively. The direction does not even matter. As long as they project confidence that they either believe or make others believe comes from something real.

Since most people hesitate before taking any bold action (even when action is what is required), single-minded focus to act tends to draw attention. People believe in them through the simple force of their character.

When Franklin Delano Roosevelt came to power amidst the Depression, much of the public had little faith he could turn things around. But in his first few months in office he displayed such confidence, such decisiveness and clarity in dealing with the country’s many problems, that the public began to see him as their savior, someone with intense charisma.

Since most people are predictable, the effect of these contradictions is devastatingly charismatic. They make you hard to fathom, add richness to your character, make people talk about you. It is often better to reveal your contradictions slowly and subtly—if you throw them out one on top of the other, people may think you have an erratic personality. Show your mysteriousness gradually and word will spread. You must also keep people at arm’s length, to keep them from figuring you out. Another aspect of mystery is a hint of the uncanny. The appearance of prophetic or psychic gifts will add to your aura. Predict things authoritatively and people will often imagine that what you have said has come true.

Most people are predictable. Most of us must compromise constantly to survive, but some do not. Some live out their ideals without caring about the consequences. Politicians such as George Washington and Lenin won impressive reputations by living simply, despite their power. They matched their political values to their personal lives. Both men were virtually deified after they died. Albert Einstein too had a charismatic aura…childlike, unwilling to compromise and seemingly lost in his own world. The key to their charismatic personality is that they already had deeply held values, before they amassed power. Although a few power-hungry individuals have attempted to pretend to hold tightly onto certain values, they cannot fake this part for long. We have seen this with countless left-wing comedians and other celebrities, who demonise Brexit for the sake of media attention, but badmouth remainers in their dressing rooms. They do not live what they believe, therefore once the truth reveals itself…no amount of charismatic charm may save their reputation.

The level of charisma depends as much on appearance as on eloquence. Unless they attempt to make a visual statement, words are the quickest way to create emotional disturbance. They can incite any emotion without referring to anything real through simple association. However, it helps if the speaker is as as caught up in the words, as the listeners are. For example, when Winston Churchill anticipated the fall of France, he held the speech “We shall fight them on the beaches”. In actuality, it was not transmitted live over the radio and it would be decades before the recording would aired. He did, however, walk into the house of commons qnd conducted a speech that were so emotionally powerful as to determine several key moments in the war.

To pull off this type of eloquence, many people use catchwords, slogans, rhythmic repetitions, phrases for the audience to repeat. Most importantly, it customised to the audience to be easily remembered.

It should be noted here that every country has its own preferences when it comes down to the style of delivery. For instance, Churchill was a slow, authoritative speaker, whereas Hitler was far more passionate.
Both radiated self-assurance, but only Churchill impressed with his calm, reserved behaviour given the situation.

Most people are repressed, and have little access to their unconscious. This is a problem that creates opportunities for those, who can encourage others to project their secret fantasies and longings onto them. Usually they initiate the process with a display of genuine disinhibition and spontaneity. Even a hint of such qualities will make people think they more powerful than they truly are.

Advertisements

The Assassination of Jo Cox

“In politics, if something doesn’t go the way you want, shoot someone. It works every time. Just like it did with the London Riots…Just like it’s working now. As long as there’s a patsy, no one cares who’s actually behind it all.”

Continue reading

Heightism, Detachment & Sociopathy – The Rules Revisited

Darwin once stated, it is not the strongest that are most likely to survive, but those most adaptable to change. Height elicits expectation, yet it does not determine personality or social standing. Despite what many men and women believe, being restricted by one’s height or weight presents a valuable challenge that would not exist, if modern society was more accepting of its innate diversity. From a historical perspective, this is far from new behaviour. However, there are countless erroneous presumptions associated with height that limit our understanding of how heightism originally came to be.

One of the earliest, common references is that of the “Napoleon Complex”, which denotes an inferiority complex or deep-rooted hang-up with one’s own height. However, the original purpose of this term is rarely analysed, nor it is considered that history is typically written by the victor. Smear campaigns were nothing new. Since we have learnt to paint on cave-walls, we have used visual and/or linguistic mediums to convey useful and impractically vain information. To twist and turn information, regardless of its accuracy stretches back to the beginning of ancient warfare. This leads us to a simple fact: Napoleon Bon Apart (5.6ft / 1.68m) was taller than Horatio Nelson (5.4ft / 1.64m). One would think that such a basic fact could easily be discerned by the masses, however, Nelson was accustomed to taking measures against “looking short”. That being said, when the height difference is below 2 inches or five centimetres, it is fairly easy to play with appearances, but whereas many people nowadays can purchase flats from nearby stores, Nelson had to devise his own methods of altering his appearance.
Nelson understood that height is as physical as it is psychological. Anyone can seem tall, while they truly aren’t. If you are bold enough, you can make anyone believe anything, but let’s not throw all caution to the wind just yet. There are physiological limits without bone-shattering application traditional Chinese surgery. Limitations that cannot be applied to the art of propaganda. He may not have been taller than his opponent, although you wouldn’t know with how much effort he invested in being referred to as the taller out of the two.
To show the extent of how successful his propaganda campaigns actually were…in honour of Nelson’s victory, the column built in Trafalgar Square was designed to be the tallest landmark in all of London. Some historians suggest that it was Nelson’s explicit wish for the highest monument to be dedicated to him, so he could oversee the entirety of the metropolis of London at the time.

As we are judged by our appearance, prior to our actions…Before we even open up our mouth, it is only logical to give yourself the best chances. In the old days, it was easier to make yourself appear taller, smarter and more capable. Nowadays, it has become much harder for anyone to pretend to be something they are not, but it is never impossible. Not for anyone…However, it appears to be easier for taller men to deceive women than their shorter counterpart. Again, not impossible. The truth is that under the right circumstances, people will turn a blind eye to almost anything, if they are otherwise occupied…They will disregard height differences, personal disagreements and even the most heart-wrenching betrayals, when the appeal to their self-interest is sufficient. Although the interests of one or more people may be temporarily aligned, that does not guarantee any form of loyalty or respect once they are not. In fact, short men and women live longer, when they’re weary of the company they keep. It is one thing to be useful, but to be repeatedly used as a stepping stone is a fate no one should settle for, regardless of their stature.

Height & Intelligence

History is full of examples, where height serves as an indicator of high intelligence or brute force. Whereas some geniuses are born, most forms of intelligence are cultivated and developed over time. In other words, every human being has the potential to enhance their natural abilities or fight against them. Whereas many living beings are driven by instinct, we have the free will to choose. In this, we are given a distinct advantage. Through conscious choice, one can overcome the height-based bias that runs riot in the world. However, we can only free ourselves, we cannot force others into the position to acknowledge the existence or negative impact of heightism.
Being short is not a handy-cap. It does not determine EQ, IQ or intelligence of thought. Here, one has to to bear in mind that the most intelligent of people were never revered throughout history, they were shunned, exiled and often murdered in the most heinous manner. However, where the general cultivation of intelligence is concerned, Jung’s theory on personality development indicates that if you are not athletically- or strength-orientated as a short person, your talent most likely lies elsewhere. Further research into the hidden talents of the “vertically challenged” shows that many excel at communication. Whereas some had to become quick witted by being subjected to abuse, others were born with the gift of the gab. It gives them an irresistible charm that makes them much more successful in the dating game. For those that are still mastering that knack for words, the trick is to say less than necessary.

Needless to mention, there are many different types of intelligence. Although we continue to quantify new forms, quantum physics suggests the avenues of intelligence are infinite. If we can conceive being a genius in a subject in our minds, it is fairly possible to cultivate the knowledge necessary to succeed. That being said, if you weren’t born swimming against the tide, I wouldn’t recommend to start now. Nurture your natural abilities, but keep an open mind. After all, you wouldn’t expect Bach, Tesla or Einstein to abandon their respective fields, for what was expected of them. Truth is not a phenomena of mass-appeal, neither is free will. The most intelligent, remarkable and revered characters throughout history were not recognised for their achievement. They did not need to be. They did what felt right for them, regardless of what society thought of them. That being said, appearance and social standing can easily override intelligence, but it depends very much on the circumstances. In such an occasion, the personality of a person often defines their instinctual reaction. (It should be noted that psychopaths are predominantly prone to react in specific ways, whereas sociopaths often lack a reaction, unless attempting to elicit a specific response.)
As stated before, there is such a thing as too intelligent. However, there are two distinct types of “high intelligence.” As paradoxical as it may seem, the first type of supremely intelligent people, capable of outsmarting the world’s finest, frequently feign ignorance to fit in. Conversely, the second type often lack the social intelligence to not outshine their master (at every turn), unless the right circumstances are in their favour.
For many, high intelligence is frightening. Combined with the lack of height, it is like drawing a bullseye on one’s back. Even if you give someone the right answer or advice, if it’s not you they wanna hear it from, then the entire endeavour is flawed from the outset. At times, we fail to realise just how intelligent those around us are, if our ego prevents us from seeing them for what they are truly capable of.
Tall or not, nothing is as it seems. We can never know anyone by their appearance or glimpses of their personality. Even the type or level intelligence only serves us to a limits degree. Truth is only time reveals the reality of a person and/or situation. Hitler considered to the Jews to be of lower intelligence. Before then, men thought of women as less intelligent. And the time before that, it was African Americans. For someone to be superior, some has to be viewed as inferior. The more superior someone is, the more inferior another becomes. In a way, it is the cycle and sway of power. Without a smidgen of humility or compassion toward their opponent, people rise to inconceivable heights. However, they must invariably fall from their high horse in this life or the next. Regardless of how sly or intelligent, no one can escape the moral consequences of their behaviour toward themselves or others. So, think twice before acting out revenge or ill-will…Think twice before judging yourself based on appearance or intelligence. Beauty and intelligence are both in the eye of the beholder. They are malleable, superficial properties that are easily altered, as is what we gain from them. However, the challenge in problem-solving is to realise that we cannot change certain aspects of ourselves, we can only overcome them by denying them the power to act upon us. If we doomed to be short, the most intelligent coping strategy is to make the best of it. Ironically, this is also one of the most effective ways to annoy and irritate those that gain a level of satisfaction from demeaning others. The lack of a reaction/response or even a simple agreement can startle the most determined bully long enough to diffuse tension, but it can also have the exact opposite effect.

Height & Mental Illness

Many short men are either depict as the arrogant smartass, the sly mediator and the cold-blooded sociopath or psychopath. However, how closely related are height and mental well-being? Although it shouldn’t have such detrimental effects, any form of discrimination takes its toll. As height and well-being are indirectly connected through the self-image that is established through childhood and adulthood. Height can never be a definite indicator of sanity and it is ludicrous that some humour this notion. From a professional standpoint, height affects many facets of life, from dating to work opportunities to socialising, which in turn affects mental and emotional health.
Truth be told, just by being short or fat, the chance of getting employed or earning more is significantly lower. After all, it could be argued that any profession that is restricted by height requirements only perpetuates a narrow-minded, inaccurate view of how height determines available career-choices and progression. However, no argument or clever statement can change the reality of the situation.
Although height discrimination has reached the realms of undeniability, that does not stop people from trying. Hell, I would depressed if interview after interview employers would take one look at me and my CV, make some excuse and hired someone half my age with less qualifications but taller. Equal employment opportunities means that it shouldn’t matter if I’m a 4ft grey alien from Alpha Centauri, every living being should have the same opportunity to prove their skills and put food on the table. To be expected to be mentally stable in such conditions is like fighting an endless tide of unrealistic expectations. It should be noted that those who demand often are not expected to deliver, if put in the same position. On a separate note, I’ve noticed short men that have risen above the negative restrictions and implications of heightism rarely associate with other short men, unless carefully selected. They wish to distance themselves as far as they can from being a target, or being associated with anything that threatens the position they have fought to gain. Those that have made it are not all cut-throat, but the majority have had to learn to function in a world of predators. As a consequence, the prey grows far beyond its former predator(s). Whereas some develop anti-social qualities to survive among psychopaths, others choose to steer their moral compass in the opposite direction. They cultivate an air of non-attachment that almost gives them a monk-like presence. They are at peace with who they are. They do not feel the urge to seek justice or vengeance…They only act when acted upon. And I have the deepest empathy for those that have fallen victim to such a powerful force. Few that I know of make it out alive with their ego intact. Some are so emasculated that it stays with them for the rest of their lives (which is most likely equivalent to what they have done to others for being short, fat or otherwise impaired in their opinion).

The Short Sociopath VS The Tall Psychopath

So far in my career, I’ve encountered short and tall sociopaths. However, I’ve always found that my colleagues would find it easier to cope with the 6ft6in than the 5ft4in service user. While episodes of violence were more common for the taller clientele, short men were far more contained but infinitely more vicious when violent. Despite the inherent danger, I’ve always been more comfortable around short sociopaths in comparison to tall psychopaths or sociopaths. Although not all short sociopaths I’ve met socially or professionally have been high functioning, the majority were highly intelligent in their own way. One that society may not be ready to acknowledge just yet, since it has no need to. As stated before, once there is a need, most will say or do anything to fill it…But what happens afterwards entirely depends on the person and circumstance.

The term psychopath and sociopath are often used to describe the worst fears anyone can have about someone we are associated with. Their true nature is thought to be egocentric, merciless and incapable of remorse. The stuff of your worst nightmares… But contrary to popular belief, you don’t need to look far to find a full-blooded psychopath or sociopath. Just switch on your TV. Whereas psychopaths thrive on attention, sociopaths often keep to the shadows. Nonetheless, both can also create shadows from which to operate. Most of us won’t have to look beyond our community to find a borderline psychopath or sociopath. The difference is tall people remain undetected far more often, unless their actions have been witnessed on a large scale. One that is not or cannot be denied.

To explain, the difference between psychopathy and sociopathy on a fundamental level is on a genetic level. Whereas both can have their hereditary roots, emotional processing is affected differently. Psychopaths, although they may not be able to feel, are often driven by an emotional need. Sociopaths are not. However, both disassociate from their emotions to variant degrees. Both are capable of vicious fits of rage, although they are often underplayed when the individual is short.
The most important difference I’ve found in dating a psychopath and a higher functioning sociopath is the need to prey on emotions. Psychopaths appear to have an inherent need to manipulate and deceive that makes them overconfident. The paranoid tendencies of a short sociopath is the textbook example that counters such the deep-rooted emotional need of the stereotypically tall and good looking psychopath.
Height does not differentiate. Since height discrimination has become an everyday occurrence, whether you’re a psychopath, sociopath or just anti-social makes no difference. If you’re short as a male, you’re doomed to be an outsider, but that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. From personal experience, short-statured people like myself either make an invested effort to follow trends or they create their own. As a psychologist, it is my firm opinion that trend-setters are always outsiders. Whether short or tall, they have the confidence to walk their own path.
However, for sociopaths, the end justifies the means. If that means their imprisonment, torture or death, then so be it. Psychopaths, due to their inherent emotional needs, have an in-build weakness, whereas once the mask of a sociopath drops…There is nothing. A vast, infinite void of emotion that drives shivers down your spine. Beyond false anger, there is dead calm silence.
In simple terms, the circuits in the cortex do not connect and/or process emotions properly…like two wires that don’t fully connect. Since they don’t, there is an accumulation of energy, leading to large bursts of emotion, when the buildup is so substantial that the connection is forced.

It is difficult for anyone to let someone close to us see us in our worst light. For sociopaths and psychopaths, the light is merely more revealing than most people can handle. Not all of us were born or conditioned to be a certain way, but none of us deserve the rejected for that fact.
Predators have their uses in any society. Historically, their talents were put to good use in the military. The more psychotic, psychopathic or sociopathic the opponent, the more insane was the person that actually defeated them. In wartimes, you wouldn’t care about the short guy wielding a battle ax like a mad man, unless he is coming toward you. The military has always been in high demand of controllable soldiers that will follow any command to the death, not uncontrollable cannon balls that wreck their projections. Psychopaths gain their power from knowing their place and when to rise above it…Sociopaths will do so regardless, if they wish to.

Being short makes that endeavour slightly more complex, as there is more to conceal and distract from. Playing with appearances is more complicated, as making oneself taller isn’t an option. Surrounding oneself by tall, but genuine, supporters is a frequently used technique. However, the tall selfless wingman that’ll deliver women on a plate is a sheer fantasy, unless they are blackmailed into doing so or persuaded by someone with a higher level power compared to them. I’ve found that when it comes to territory, many men do not remove women from the equation. That being said, women are no longer subject to arranged marriages or career-restraints, but we are just as vulnerable to social engineering. Particularly, in the case of male heightism.
When we become chronically dissatisfied with ourselves, it becomes hard to hide. People sense, feel and see that one person, which drags the group down. On the other hand, every group also has its leader: the alpha male or female. Whereas tall psychopaths or sociopaths often have the opportunity to cosy up to them by replacing the beta…Their short counterpart often has to strike with fierce momentum to displace or even scatter the group (with less beneficial results). In conclusion, height doesn’t affect the severity of a condition, but at times it forces men in the position to overcompensate merely to be noticed. Unfortunately, by the time they are noticed, their reactions have often been torn so far out of proportion that they distract from the issue at hand.

The Dreaming Universe

Fred Wolfs Approach on Jungian and Freudian Thought

Dreams appear to break free of space and time limitations. Since the beginning of recorded history, humanity has examined the nature of dreams due to their influence upon waking life. For instance Wolfgang Pauli, who was working towards a theory that would overlap quantum physics and psychology, which was revealed to him by dream images. The holographic model of consciousness and certain concepts from quantum physics has also revealed a great deal of insight towards the mind-body problem. Nonetheless, although dreams had been investigated for thousands of years, Sigmund Freud was most likely the first western researcher that scientifically analysed dreams. Prior to his work, most medical professionals perceive dreams to be hallucinations, which were essentially useless. In contrast to this, Freuds model of dreams stated that they were expressions of the unconscious that had become repressed during early childhood,, after the child expressed wishes that remain unfulfilled. Wishes and desires were therefore strongly represented in dreams and represented yearnings that appeared during the four critical states of growth (oral, anal, phallic and genital). It was Freuds hope that he would be able to identify his clients repressed or buried wishes. Thus images were viewed at the disguised representations of the forbidden desires of the individual. Such a disguise was necessary so that the dreamer would not awaken, thus placing sleep as the primary state of consciousness that vital to human life. In Freuds model of the unconscious, two basic drives or instincts were recognized, which are aggression and eroticism. By 1923, he had replaced them with life and death drives. These drives were in turn attributable to the compulsion to repeat, in regards to habits and repeated patterns. In summary, the ego corresponds to the sense of self that is experienced. Just as Freud offered a structure of the psyche based on mechanism, Jung went further and indicated that the structure had to include meaningful relationships other than those that are time-ordered and cause-effect related. It was Jungs perspective that Freud placed too much emphasis on the erotic element of dreams. He also considered that wish fulfilment was far too small to underlie or be the cause of all dreams. Whereas Freud believed that sleep was the cause and dreams were the inevitable consequence, Jung believed that dreams were primary and seep was a sufficient alteration of consciousness to allow dreams to take place. Jungs model for instance places significant value on the process of individuation, which is a personal development wherein a connection between the centre of the psyche and the ego, the central part of consciousness, occurs. Dreams to him were also a map of possibility. Within the dream state, the observer is not localised to one region of the brain. The observer is distributed throughout the brain, picking up information from several memory locations simultaneously. The quantum wave in the brain is dependent upon all of the possible locations of the observer in order for memory recall in one location to be instantly correlated with other locations, giving rise to meaningful overlaps of that which is usually separated memories.

“Our minds operate mostly unconsciously.”

Freud originally discovered that human beings appear to perform tasks unconsciously. Dreams also appear to operate unconsciously. According to the work of Benjamin Libet, a neurophysiologist, the mind mostly operates unconsciously. In essence, this means, that decisions and responses to sensations are made from the outside world on an entirely unconscious basis. Human beings only become conscious of the phenomenal world approximately half a second later. Interestingly, we refer the late moment of conscious awareness back in time to the moment of sensation and out in space to the location of stimulus, even if it is outside our bodies. This is otherwise known as temporal referral and the latter is known as special referral. For instance, if the brain of a subject is stimulated in a particular area of the cortex, if the individual will feel sensations in the body. The mechanisms by which visual images are reconstructed are located within the brains, neural networks and retinas. In a similar manner, human beings reconstruct from sounds through the vibration of the eardrums and the approximate location of the sound source in space. Libets experiments showed that one might expect a certain amount of delay between the timing of conscious awareness of events, assuming that such awareness can be mapped in time and the time when a stimulus is applied. Libet referred to his theory of consciousness as time-on theory or subjective referral in time. His data showed that an individual, although able to react swiftly to stimuli within a hundred thousandth of a second (one hundred miliseconds) is not actually aware of what the individual is reacting to for several hundred milliseconds, up to a full half second. Yet, when interrogated in regards to the time of awareness, the individual responds as if he or she were aware at the time of the stimulus. His model portrayed that unconscious processes are far more important in our lives that previously imagined. Consequently, a large amount of experience of the phenomenal world is projected from the subjective inner worlds. To grasp Libets findings entirely though, it is necessary to carefully examine the form of the signal as it is detected on the somatosensory cortex. One discovers that it consists of four distinct time zones. The first time zone of the signal is a sharp electrically positive potential that arrives 15ms after the skin stimulus and persists for around 35ms. Libet believed that this pulse served as a time marker, a referral signal for apparent conscious awareness. This is quickly followed by a deep, wide negative potential that persists for around 100ms. Thirdly a low positive hump can be found lasting for around 150 to 200ms, followed fourthly by a shallow negative potential lasting for around 200 to 250ms. All together, the sum of intervals, composes the complex signal that lasts for around 500ms. Conclusively, Libet also showed that there is no conscious sensation of this until the full five hundred millisecond period of the total signal has passed. In other terms, the brain requires to have all of this signal passing into the somatosensory cortex before any awareness of the skin stimulation is consciously felt. If for any reason, certain parts of the signal are blocked, the individual will not be aware of the skin stimulus. In fact, Libet has shown that the S1 response is not even necessary for awareness. When the cortical surface is stimulated, it was found that individuals became aware even though no S1 response was present, thus no one is aware of any stimuli until 500ms have passed.

Purpose of REM

During the day, human beings take in an exponential amount of data. Numerous amount of the input to the brain are of the type described by the neural networks, partial memories that evoke full memories. A certain amount of these inputs, however, eventually cause the interneural connections, via the synapses, to overload. When REM sleep is entered, the dreams are the products of neurons feeding back on themselves without stimuli coming in through the senses. As such, they are negative feedback loops, weakening the strengths of some of the connections with other neurons, similar to the negative weight biasing in the computer networks used by Hopfield et al. Thus, the dreams can turn into erasure modes, helping the individual to become refreshed by making desired or important for survival memories equally accessible and ridding us of undesirable, bizarre memories, those that do not play any role in survival. A major objection is found in experimental studies of individual that are deprived of REM sleep for numerous nights, usually up to one week, one would expect according to theoretical evidence that these individual would exhibit increased periods of fantasy and imagination, possibly even hallucinations. This is because the ‘unlearning’ throughout the night has not taken place and the unwanted memories would not be erased. Although there is some evidence for this, however, the general opinion of researchers is that when human beings or animals are deprived of REM sleep, their behaviour is not affected in any obvious or predictable manner. Waking a dreamer at the onset of REM tends to after several nights produce a rebound effect. It becomes more and more difficult to accomplish. By the end of a weeks deprivation of sleep, the individual enters REM states around fifty times night, suggesting that in these cases the individual may be ‘snatching’ periods of REM during the waking hours. Drug-inducted suppression of sleep is not much better since the medication is known to produce countless side-effects that could mask the result.
It should be noted that certain animals, although they possess larger brains, do not experience REM sleep. Hence, the relatively larger brains of these animals is connected to their lack of REM sleep, as they would require a larger neural network to absorb unwanted associations. This would tend to minimize overlaps in the networks of these animals.

Dreamtime

‘Aborigines believed in two forms of time. Two parallel streams of activity. One is the daily objective reality to which you and I are confined. The other is an infinite spiritual cycle called the dreamtime, more real that reality itself. Whatever happens in the dreamtime establishes the values, symbols and laws of the Aboriginal society. Some people of unusual spiritual powers have contact with the dreamtime.’ In modern times, the aboriginal outlook is still shaped by the dreaming, as it may. Yet, the relationship between dreaming and life remains a problem. Firstly, dreaming must be considered a phenomenon. It is that which is. According to the Puntupi tribes of central Australia, it is a framework for human behaviour. It is a projection into a symbolic space of social processes and it must be related to individuals lives. For the Pintupi, it must also be related to something that transcends everyday life. Dreaming can also be presumed to transcend the space-time of the immediate. The landscape is viewed as tracks of the totemic animal spirits that once walked the earth and by becoming stone themselves, they became the earth. Just as everyday animals leave their tracks ob the ground, these totemic beings leave theirs. In addition, this can be related to the concept of solipsism. In the book, The Secret of Dreaming, Jim Poulter shares a story, which is in actuality a dreamtime recounting of evolution, yet this time evolution has a purpose that transcends mere survival, for each individual dreams of something beyond itself. Poulter believed that this capacity to see beyond oneself, to see into the future, to imagine possibilities that do not seem to exist in the immediate environment, is a unique facette of consciousness. The Spirit constructs existence through this ability in order to go beyond what is to what could be. In other terms, to dream. The reason behind this for Poulter lies in responsibility. The crucial aboriginal concept is the belief that the Big Dream continues, as humanity is awakening to a greater sense of care and responsibility for the future. All humans et to be are waiting in the dreamtime for their births. The astral dimension, as it is also called. Gradually, as evolution proceeds, the responsibility will become clearer that all mankind is a part of a bigger dream of a larger spirit and that the care-taking of ones fellow man should become a necessitated priority. The development of the fetus is a microcosm of the development of the universe itself. It is stated that the fetus goes through every state of life, beginning with the single-celled animal, passing through the final state, complete with gills, all the way up th the present human form. The dreamtime therefore also represents a step towards the meaning of matter. It is to communicate all possibilities to all existences in order for the collective consciousness to attain a higher degree of self-awareness and realisation.

Telepathy

Certain definitions of consciousness are restricted to waking perception processing. Hobson perceived that consciousness is a kind of awareness that may not be only awareness of the outside world but also its representation in the brain. If so, the dream consciousness is definitely an altered state of consciousness. With quantum physics as a metaphorical basis, an insight into the timeless nature of dreams can be gained. Nearly entirely unconscious, the processes of the ID include mental forms that have never been observed as well as memories that have been repressed. These memories unlike the unobserved mental forms, influence the mental and physical life of the individual. It should be noted that during REM periods, the EEG pattern is similar to the waking state pattern. Evidence towards psychic phenomena often involves information that is normally received or experienced in one state of consciousness being made available when the recipient was in another. For instance, the dreamer would become aware of events occurring in waking life. Montague Ullman and others regarded telepathic dreams and the role of dreams in the interconnectedness of the species. Telepathic dreams include dreams of prophecy, links between a dream and an individual in waking life, dreams that connect one dreamer with another, and dreams in which an awake individual attempts to send images to a dreamer. Ullman pointed out that the precognitive dreams are distinguished from telepathic dreams and that even though both are paranormal, telepathy normally refers only to paranormal contact between ones mind and other minds present or past but not future. He also explained that most paranormal dreams are precognitive rather than telepathic. Consistent with the possibility for quantum waves to travel forward, backward and sideways in time. Ordinary or non-telepathic dreams differ from telepathic dreams in only one way. The data that is correlated during the dream. Ordinary dreams usually correlate the days remembered experience with past associations or future expectations contained as memories. They can also introduce anti-correlations as a mechanism to wipe associations or memories that do not serve the survival or the individual or the species. Telepathic dreams are quite different in that they tend to correlate feelings and emotions with space-time events. Closely connected to telepathic dreams is the related issue as theorized by Montague Ullman that dreams serve to help the human species survive with survival of the individual as a secondary but necessary issue.

Relationship Between Dreams And The Physical Body

Implicit in the holographic model is the notion that we sense as out there in the physical world is not as it seems at all. It is reminiscent of the Buddhist idea of impermanence. Nothing within the phenomenal world appears to be permanent or fixed. All remains to be in a state of flux. Solid objects are not really solid at all, they only appear to be such to the human senses. Thus, everything that is sensed is only a passing instance, a glimpse of reality. Virtual images are created as illusions of objects. The light that would be seen, when the virtual image that appears is viewed, which is coming from the image, when it in actuality it is not. Von Franz stated that ‘Whenever the human mind confronts an unknown, it invents symbolic models, drawing on preconscious process of projection. In the history of mankind, we therefore find numerous symbolic representation of the unus mundus. This one world as a continuum consisting of images, as a geometrical continuum or as a numerical structured system. With Einsteins general theory of relativity, mass becomes part of space-time and is unified with energy through the famous equation E=MC2. The idea is to see all of physics as a geometrical continuum, paralleling Jung’s one world concept. So far, science has attempted to look at all processes in the universe in a rational manner has failed to grasp how the material universe could be affected by the processes that resist measurement based on space, time and mass. Yet, it is clearly visible that human behaviour is often determined by the images carried by the individual consciousness. Thus, a body’s symptoms are not to be dealt with purely mechanically similar to pathologies. Instead, symptoms are potentially meaningful and purposeful conditions signalling a phase of life or in order to bring one closer to the centre of existence. Mindell concluded from his patients illness that the condition could be an expression of emotion, which is how the dreambody was developed. It is both a dream and a body. Mindell also states that he not once found a case, in which the individuals dreams did not reflect the body’s symptoms. The dreambody can be related to the physical body in much the same way that the quantum wave function that gives the probability of a particle’s state can be related to the particle’s physical state.

Non-Ordinary Reality

If the imaginal realm is ontologically real, which means that is has objective existential quality as Henry Corbin suggests, then the question is how come only few individuals of the human race have encountered this reality? For Corbin, the imaginal realm was more irrefutable and coherent than the world experienced during the waking state. Beholders of the imaginal realm had reported to him that they were perfectly aware of having journeyed elsewhere. These individuals were not schizophrenic or mentally ill. The world that they had experienced was not fantasy. It was a world with form and dimension and even other life-forms. One may wish to consider the words of Carl Sagan, who believed that there was a connection between dreams and evolution. In shamanistic terms, one may refer to these phenomena as evidence towards a universal mind. The self-reflective mind that knows that it knows. The universal mind knows everything, anything and perhaps surprisingly it knows nothing. Its nothingness is described by Buddhist philosophers and practitioners as the state of pure awareness, consciousness without an object of consciousness. In it, moments, events, fly by as ephemeral flashes like fireflies, but nothing is adhered tom nothing is given any value. In essence, everything is seen as a dream. If the universal mind is a composite of our minds, then how is that composite mind integrated? If the process is akin to a superposition of quantum states of awareness, then the results of that superposition will be another state that does not share in the qualities of the separated states. Only if the minds are decoupled, only if there is something that keeps the patterns in the superposition of the minds from emerging, will there be anything like an objective quality emerging in any single mind at all. Yet, if one were to carry this concept further, given the reality of the universal mind, then the mind separations that produce the results of objectivity are an illusion and as such, the reality of the universal mind will from time to time appear within the individual minds. However, it should be noted that the ability to predict and control nature violates the basic paradigm of science, which is not entirely accurate. Humanity has the capacity to predict and manipulate nature, yet it has its consequences, as noted by the recent polar vortex, which is currently passing through Russia. Nonetheless, Niels Bohr was of the opinion that the complementarity, which existed between the wave and the particle aspects of nature were indications of a much deeper complimentarity in which irreconcilable pairs of opposites need not be contradictory. As he once stated, “the opposite of a small truth may be a lie, but the opposite of a great truth is also a great truth.” In essence, the universal mind would strive towards overall self-realisation of its true nature. The non-ordinary reality merely offers symbolic truth in order to decipher the larger picture and recognize the interconnected nature of the universe.

Sense of Self

Bruce S. Dewitt once stated “The many world interpretation of quantum mechanics reveals a universe that is constantly splitting into a stupendous number of branches, all resulting from the measurement like interactions between its myriad of components. Moreover, every quantum transition, taking place on every star, every galaxy, in every remote corner of the universe is splitting our local world into myriads of copies of itself.” Moreover, there is evidence of brain cellular mitosis occurring, but not in neural cells. Certain studies indicate that the glial cells perform metabolic function, also providing nourishment for neural cells. It should be noted that Albert Einsteins brain autopsy after the time of his death showed a larger than average amount of glial cells associated with his visual cortex. This led countless of individuals to suspect their association with intellect and the enhanced ability to visualise abstract concepts. Nowadays, it has been discovered that dementia severs the connection between the glial cells and neurons, resulting it neuronal death. Studies performed by Karl Lashley between 1920 and 1950 indicated that memory was based on the formation of engrams, which are not localised in specific places but distributed holographically, as it may, throughout the brain. Furthermore, the sense of self is connected to self-awareness through memory and body awareness. With diminished body awareness and volitional control, the self appears to expand, losing its bearings in time and space. In conclusion, there are more than likely thousands of pieces of information and/or images within the glial cell memory. These images are states of quantum physical observables and must follow the rules of quantum superposition. Consequently, any composition of a superposition of states will be complimentary to all other levels. Thus, the secondary images are complimentary to all the primary and tertiary images. The tertiary images are complimentary to all primary and secondary images and so forth. Although a single automaton cannot simultaneously hold multiple images consisting of complimentary observations of another system, it can hold multiple images simultaneously, consisting of complimentary observation of images built up self-reflectively. In other terms, if the images contain the observer as well as the observed, the automaton can recall them. Images of objective, external observations cannot be held simultaneously as the simultaneous knowledge of objective complimentary observables is in violation of the uncertainty principle. Thus to perform the same act with objective images is scientifically impossible, according to quantum physics. In conclusion, an object in a state of self-reflection can hold both truth and its opposite at the same time without the creation of a paradox, while the attempt to determine the same thing results in doubt or uncertainty. It should be noted that any single image will correspond to a specific quantum physical state, while the superposition of images would also correspond to the complimentary physical state of an emotion, thought form, archetype or superarchetype. The automaton could measure and thereby obtain various combinations of images in groups of 1-4 or more of these images, It could obtain a single image or all of the images together, thus constructing the complete superarchetype. Conclusively, the awareness of self is intrinsically linked with the decrease of automatic and mechanical behaviour, resulting in greater choices and becoming more aware of ones own behaviour, dreams, decisions, universe and subsequently of existences in other worlds.

One Single Being

In essence, reality is made of probabilities that can be coherent in order for the possibility to form into solid matter. The dream state is a location, in which the quantum reality becomes especially transparent and the mixture of mind and matter is revealed in a variety of ways. Nevertheless, if we all possess such archetypal images constituting the unconscious minds, these images would be on a deeper level than personal experiences. Conclusively, these archetypes would arise from a more fundamental level of reality. In this sense, the dream becomes more fundamental than the objective reality. Fred Alan Wolf suggests that “When we dream, we return to that reality in order to gain information about how to survive in this reality, yet survival may not be as it seems from a single perspective.” The materialist philosopher believes that consciousness arises from matter. If consciousness exists in matter, then matter is consciousness. Furthermore, everything arises in relation to everything else, reality appears not only interconnected, but also interdependent. Conversely, we as human beings often become afraid when others inform us of that which is real and that which is not. We sense an inner conflict with that which we are told. We feel fear, as we know that the viewpoint of a political system is not consistent with our own standpoint. Communism, capitalism and war is not the answer to the world, it is a tendency towards self-hatred and self-destruction. Whatever we imagine often begins to appear, as if it was called into existence, particularly fearful images, which is reminiscent of a self-fulfilling prophecy created by ones own mind. We create these images as realities because the universe is ambivalent and paradoxical. It is of no matter what is produced, as at the most fundamental level of existence, it is capable of forming reality into whatever images are produced. A famous philosopher once enquired “If we light a candle and walked out of the room, does it still burn?” By this he was trying to highlight that it takes a mind to confirm something’s existence. Existence depends on mind because all of existence occurs within mind. We can know of the existence of our universe only because we have a mind and we can manipulate creation only because we have a mind. Mind is the true cause behind effect and therefore all things are of mental nature. Life is interconnected and is truly capable of being one giant life form that is continually expanding, adapting, and evolving in complexity. The binding force of all life therefore becomes consciousness.

Should Psychology And Physics Be Combined?

There is a breach between the fields of physics and psychology. Indeed, between physics and psychology there is a whole abyss. That is understandable if we take into account the different histories and different goals of each of these disciplines. Yet, it does not have to continue to be so in the future, especially if we take into account the fact that both disciplines aim at expanding our knowledge, if we take into account the fact that in the world around us everything is connected to everything by a communicating vessel. All things seem to be connected either by causal links or, as suggested by a physicist Wolfgang Pauli and psychologist Carl Jung, by some “acausal connecting principle.”
In essence the combination of psychology and physics, otherwise known as psychophysics quantitatively investigates the relationship between physical stimuli and the sensations and perceptions they affect. Psychophysics has been described as “the scientific study of the relation between stimulus and sensation” or, more completely, as “the analysis of perceptual processes by studying the effect on a subject’s experience or behaviour of systematically
varying the properties of a stimulus along one or more physical dimensions.” It was founded in the laboratory of German Gustav Fechner, psychophysics is one of the parents of modern experimental psychology. It demonstrated that mathematical analysis could be applied to subjective reports, and that principled relationships could be discovered between physical quantities and subjective impressions.
Let us examine a famous example, Weber’s Law, named after Ernst Weber, a colleague of Fechner’s. This formula describes how changes in the subjective perception of stimulus intensity (e.g. how heavy a weight feels) are related to the actual change in stimulus magnitude (how much something actually weighs). You can look up the mathematics of this if you’re interested, but a plain-language interpretation is that to increase the perceived intensity of a stimulus you need to increase its physical magnitude by a constant proportion, not a constant absolute amount. Imagine that you can make an empty bag feel heavier by putting in a book, yet a single book won’t make a bag full of bricks feel heavier, even though in both cases you are adding the same amount of weight. Weber’s Law gives you a mathematical way to calculate how much you would need to increase or decrease the physical weight to produce a subjective impression of a change in heaviness. It also allows you to compare sensitivity between the senses, showing, for example that we are more sensitive to brightness than loudness, because the proportional change needed to create a noticeable difference for lights is smaller than that needed for sounds. As well as discovering many of the few laws that exist in psychology, psychophysics has generated methods and theories which are applied across all of experimental psychology, not just in the investigation of sensation and perception. In applying scientific measurement to subjective experience, the early psychophysicists were demonstrating a faith in empiricism, but they were also throwing themselves upon a dilemma – the attempt to relate the world of the measurable and objective to the subjective inner world of sensation. That dilemma is still just as relevant and profound today in all areas of psychology, and psychophysics is still vital as a toolkit for addressing it.
Sensory perception and interart research seems to occur these days in the in-between spaces of art history, literature, media studies, anthropology, neurological sciences, and numerous more disciplines that contribute to the exploration of a new aesthetics. This new aesthetics very much includes aesthesis or the study of physiologically and psychologically infused perceptive abilities in the human. Yet, what happened to the term “psychophysics” in this arena? A long-out-of-print volume, Sensory Communication by Walter Rosenblith, based on a 1959 symposium, has recently been reissued by MIT Press. It reminds us of pioneers like Fechner, criticized therein, in the early days of experiential aesthetics and of the nascent fascination with the human-computer interface and AI around the middle of the 20th century. S.S. Stevens poignantly extracts and highlights the ambiguities inherent to research in psychophysics, playing into the qualitative-quantitative divide co-existent with C.P. Snow’s “two cultures”. “It must be confessed at the outset that psychophysics has often failed to do its part of the job [it tells what the organism can do and it asks those who are inspired by such mysteries to advance our understanding of how such wonders are performed] with distinction. Its task is not easy. For one thing, long-standing prejudices, derived in great measure from a chronic dualistic metaphysics, have triggered a variety of stubborn objections whenever it has been proposed that sensation may be amenable to orderly and quantitative investigation. You cannot, the objectors, complain, measure the inner, private, subjective strength of a sensation. Perhaps not, in the sense the objectors have in mind, but in a different and very useful sense the strength of a sensation can, as we shall see, be fruitfully quantified. We must forgo arguments about the private life of the mind and ask sensible objective questions about the input-output relations of sensory transducers as these relations are disclosed in the behavior of experimental organisms, whether men or animals.”
Furthermore, the theory of psychophysical parallelism states that mental and physical experiences occur simultaneously and are not necessarily bound by any causal interaction. The theory was established in the early 19th century by a German philosopher Gustav Theodor Fechner, also famous for the Weber-Fechner law. While the psychophysical parallelism definition might seem a bit unclear, the theory is very interesting and is one of few philosophical theories which have been accepted by numerous scientists. To better understand Fechner’s approach to mind-body problem a little historical background would be helpful. In the middle of the 19th century, with a more and more rapid progression of scientific thought, many philosophers became interested in explaining the nature of mind and body interaction. This lead to a famous materialism dispute as the opponents of metaphysical philosophy gained many supporters (Vogt, Büchner, Moleschott). Materialistic approach to mind-body dichotomy was at that time seen as very radical, and some of its points still cause much controversy in the 21st century. One of Carl Vogts more memorable quotes around the time was most likely his statement that “Thoughts issue from the brain just as gall is produced by the liver or urine by the kidneys.” Consequently, are our thoughts just like other bodily fluids which are generated in a similar way as numbers in computer programmes? Are we just very sophisticated machines? Gustav Fechner claimed to be able to give the solution to materialism debate. His theory, known as psychophysical parallelism, was first mentioned in 1820s but it was not until 1860 that his approach became widely known, thanks to his mature work Elements of Psychophysics. There are many misconceptions about the meaning of psychophysical parallelism. Countless individuals seem to confuse it with occasionalism, pre-established harmony and Cartesian doctrine of two non-interacting substances. You may read on other websites that psychophysical parallelism is a theory established by Leibniz. It is true that psychophysical parallelism is partially congruent with Leibniz’s theory of non-causal conformity of the soul and the organic body. However, a very important difference is that Fechner rejected any theological grounds for his theory and therefore, even though psychophysical parallelism is a dualistic conception, by no means should it be confused with statements made either by Descartes or Leibniz. Fechner’s theory states that while mental and physical states are not causally dependent they are functionally dependent. What does it mean? It means that to every mental event there is a corresponding brain event. It does not claim causal interaction, it does not deny it. It refrains from explaining the nature of mind and body. It is a very open paradigm. By many it is treated as a good and neutral foundation for more detailed explanations of the nature of mind and body problem albeit the theory itself does not answer many questions.
In other terms, psychophysics attempts to understand the relationship between a physical stimulus and the psychological impression it creates or how the physical world influences the mind. The connection between perception and psychophysics is that perception is one of the constructs examined in the psychological part of the equation. Psychophysics uses quantitative measurements to analyze the relationship between the sensations and perceptions caused by stimuli. The relationship between perception and psychophysics is an important one in that what a person perceives to be so is not always indicative of the stimulus. Stimuli possess different properties which affect whether a person is aware of them or not and dictate their identification. The degree of difference between stimuli will affect whether they are distinguishable or not and to what magnitude a stimulus needs to reach before judgment of similarity and difference can be made.
There are three methods used to measure perception in psychophysics. They are magnitude estimation, matching and detection or discrimination. In magnitude estimation, the subject is required to rate a stimulus on how bright or loud it is on a scale. Matching requires the subject to find the stimuli which are similar in look, sound or pitch. In detection, the subject is asked to discriminate between small differences in intensity or whether a light was flashed or a sound played. Two important terms used in perception and psychophysics are the “absolute threshold” and “difference threshold.” Absolute threshold refers to the smallest detectable amount of stimulus energy, and the difference threshold, or just noticeable difference, refers to the smallest detectable difference between two stimuli.
One of the most important precepts in perception and psychophysics is Weber’s Law which states that the difference threshold between two stimuli is proportional to the baseline or starting intensity. That is, if a small increase in intensity is applied to a small parameter, then that increase can be detected. However, if that same small increase is applied to a larger parameter, it will no longer be detectable.
More and more studies, while not disproving altogether Woody Allen’s theory that the brain is the second most important organ, continue to amass evidence to the contrary. In a paradoxical twist, the field of Psycho-Physics may yet reveal that what we think about disorders in the brain may actually have a greater impact on the brain than their treatment, even the disorders themselves. In fact, what we now perceive as abnormal may soon be the new normal. Recent technologies, along with new diagnostic procedures, are so sophisticated that if there is even the possibility of a disorder, or the need or desire for one, it can be detected. This has raised new questions about the nature of consciousness and the impact of thought on the treatment of mental disease. Indeed, on the proposed invention of it.
This re-visioning of how we think casts a not inconsiderable shadow over the mental health profession regarding a possible bias against the individual psychic disposition. Statistics show that abnormalities in the brain have increased significantly with modern treatment, and this has left some experts to wonder if part of the problem might not be obscured in a broad and all-inclusive classification system. Owing to vague definitions and bloated latitudes, they charge, the individual is viewed as a “mere aggregate of eccentricities.” According to self-reports, the average treatment of twelve sessions per mental health consumer indicated substantial progress. Studies by competitors of those undergoing treatment for extended periods, however, showed actual recovery rates similar to those with no treatment at all. Some conditions even deteriorated with more treatment, prompting many to call for a revaluation of criteria. Insiders reveal that cases are presumed cured only upon depletion of the consumer’s bank account: when the aforesaid is enabled to independently obtain the necessities of existence: twice the mortgage affordable under the most ideal economic conditions, insurance-poverty, and self-medication when feeling overwhelmed. Independent follow-up studies by law firms representing creditors and maxed-out family members, however, found that ninety per cent of consumers returned for more treatment within two years. The discovery that they had minds, yet not knowing what to do with them, sent them back to work in such off-balanced whirlwinds of nervous energy that resuming therapy was a priority even after having gone destitute paying for it in the first place. Recidivism rates compared with those of penitentiary internment. This has led some to suggest a possible “addiction to therapy.”
Crime rates, likewise, didn’t vary significantly between the two groups with one notable exception. Those who underwent treatment before incarceration, once out of a facility, tended to commit more heinous crimes than those whose social stations hadn’t permitted therapy. Once in the system, those under such loose parameters as bible-studies, hand-basket weaving as a means of spiritual contact with the underworld were slightly less violent upon release than those undergoing formal therapy. Psycho-Physics has recently emerged as one of a handful of new approaches which have begun to question the uncritical piling up of statistical data in support of the health industry’s interests along with Eye Rotation Therapy and Tapping. Psycho-Physics is discarding the conventional mantle of scientific pretense for more holistic models which address the individual through pledged commitments to wishful thinking and the power of suggestion.
According to Dr. Aylien Creacher of the Institute for Modern Solipsism stated that “Psycho-Physics proper began with my historical studies of individuality. “Psycho” meaning of course, “crazy”, was combined with “physics”. Greek for “out there”, which also included projected ideas of the body to describe a process of self-examination applied by the individual through the use of concepts designed to free the true personality from the Procrustean bed of modern theory. At the core of Psycho-Physics is the concept of projection. Certain feelings and inner experiences confirm it as psychologically meaningful; however, it cannot be scientifically proven to actually exist. The subjective nature of it makes it relative to the individual in all cases. “Since it is recalcitrant to objective appraisal, it’s seldom employed as a conscious tool for assessment. This ensures that its negative effects work unconsciously. The evaluation of one subjective attitude by another automatically assumes the nature of a value judgment. To regard such projections as belonging only to the consumer and not the practitioner, for example, leads to quite arbitrary conclusions and is therefore scientifically untenable, not to say intellectually unethical. The definition of projection presupposes its functioning in all minds, regardless of personal fantasy. In point of fact, the practioner’s projections actually self-replicate based on the very design of the process itself. The principle of negative sums predicts that the practitioner’s projections will exceed those of others involved.” In conclusion, all the examples of scientific research above have clearly shown that psycho-physics, although it has become distributed and separated amongst numerous sectors and titles, continues to result in discoveries that allow for a greater insight into the nature of mind and matter. One may only dream of that which could be possible, if mankind were to concentrate their focus towards the actual merging and development of the two as a scientific discipline.

Detachment Versus Sociopathy

Introduction

Within philosophy, the term detachment represents a state in which an individual overcomes their attachment toward desire for all objects, individuals or concepts of the phenomenal world, henceforth attaining a heightened perspective. Within Bahá’í Faith, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism and Taoism, non-attachment, which stands for the release from desire as well as suffering, is a significant principle and ideal. Detachment is also a central concept in Zen Buddhism. One of the most important technical Chinese terms for detachment is “wú niàn” (無念), which literally means “no thought.” This does not signify the literal absence of thought, but rather the state of being “unstained” (bù rán 不染) by thought. Therefore, non-attachments represents being detached from one’s thoughts. It is the separation of the individual from their own thoughts and opinions in detail as to not be harmed mentally and emotionally by them. The mentality is generally also applied towards others. In addition, within Hinduism the view of detachment comes from the understanding of the nature of existence and the true ultimate state sought by the practitioner. In other terms, while one is responsible and mindful without concerns of the past as well as future. The detachment is focused towards the result of one’s actions rather than towards all aspects of life. This concept is cited extensively within Puranic and Vedic literature.

Zen and Sociopathy

There are a variety of parallels between sociopathy and Zen Buddhism, such as emotional detachment, non-attachment to the self and mindfulness. In addition, Buddhists, similar to sociopaths, can appear as unemotional or emotionally cold. Conversely, Buddhism appreciates emotions as well as deeds that are spontaneous and based upon intuition, merely not those arising from logic or the rational mind, as it may. Yet, a sociopath is genetically  provided with the free will of choice, as it may, to develop the will to form attachments or to detach from their surroundings. The archetype of the monk and the sociopath, in fact, are reflections of one another. Whereas the Monk strives to detach himself, the sociopath often attempts to involve himself. Although there is a fine line between morally righteous actions, conducted for the progression of mankind, and morally corrupt actions that serve merely the perpetrator. According to Carl Jung, this line also exists on the fourth stage of individuation. Nonetheless, would it even be probable to suggest that the sociopathic mind is closer to enlightenment? Or perhaps on the other side of it? The monk and the sociopath view the nature of reality from almost exactly opposite perspectives, operating at entirely different parallels. For instance, a sociopath can be threatened and perplexed by emotion due to the unpredictability that it brings. Emotion has the capacity to throw actions out of balance, as it may, disrupting the behaviour of the individual. The monk, however, aims to distance themselves from emotion whilst remaining compassionate towards the emotions of others. To a sociopath that is easily agitated, an emotional outburst could trigger the desire to interfere with the behaviour of the individual, resulting a variety of probable outcomes, ranging from loss of consciousness due to blunt force head trauma to death caused by the rapid snapping of the neck. The monk, on the other hand, would view it as being provided with an opportunity of growth through the challenge of calming the unsettled individual with emotional support and meditative practises.

Mindfulness

To centre oneself entirely in the present moment requires the gradual release of the attachment to all forms of thought, most significantly the self. It also necessitates the letting go of ones attachment to emotions, which are also a kind of thought. In essence, the individual ceases to think and feel. “As long as one is caught up thinking or feeling, one is occupied reflecting or anticipating.” Within Buddhism, to live in such states of illusion perpetuated by thought is represented by The First Truth, which states that life is suffering. To therefore release the attachments to their own thoughts allows the individual to raise their level of awareness, which with freedom from illusion and suffering is attained. This increase in awareness is accompanied by compassion, arising from the direct experience of the individuals connection to all within existence through the regular practice of meditation. According to Buddhism, all beings possess the Buddha nature within themselves, even if it does not surface throughout an entire lifetime. This illustrates that at the core…we are all the same. Perceiving the subject in this manner, the difference between the sociopath and the monk is an illusion in itself.

The Mask of the Self

What are we without words? What are we without form? If one were to simply look at any individual as a whole, disregarding any thoughts of attraction or judgement. Merely perceiving them as they are. Usually until that individual speaks, they possess no language or nationality, yet we have already categorised them according to social class, status and appearance. These are also labelled as attachments…Attachments to that which is perceived as inappropriate and to that which is considered to be socially acceptable. Once one can get passed all superficial matters and observe another being,  perceiving them as possessing a unique personality and mind of their own…A intricate purpose and path of their own, which is connected to you through the very nature of reality itself. By mere existence upon the same planet, the same country or the same city, one human being affects another, often without conscious realisation. Succeeding all the challenges and struggles of life, we will all inevitable have to discover a manner, in which to live with ourselves and our surroundings. Humanity no longer values nature in the ways they used to. In fact, within the United States it has become against federal law to grow any kind of food in the garden of the average American citizen. Needless to mention, numerous elderly ladies were arrested and received ample amounts of fines and prison time to ponder upon their wrongdoings. Yet, have any human rights actually been violated? It would perhaps dent the wallets of the local supermarket. The true goal has a much more profound affect, the illegality of self-sufficiency. Within modern society, the archetype of the true monk has nearly faced extinction. Except for a few remote corners of the world, there are not as many die-hard monks as there used to be. Monks that would rise at 4am each morning to perform aerobic exercises and then spend countless hours in meditation every day. The ideal monk is in a meditative state throughout waking and sleeping consciousness, continuously focused upon the present. Such an individual cannot exist within modern Western society. They would represent all that which the capitalist and the socialist wish to abolish by pure nature of being. It is the monks way to simply be.
Not try, not do… To just be.
Everyone has at one point made a mistake that was irreparable. Some more than others. Learning by failure is a process that we all experience within life. Yet, once one puts aside superficial differences or quarrels with ourselves and others, one arrives at the inference that the suffering of life, its encompassing attachments and illusions, is a universal condition.

Conclusion

Within most organised religions, the vow of poverty stands for the physical side of detachment, whereas Eastern religions focus their energies upon purifying as well as cleansing the body, mind and spirit. They are intrinsically aware that each individual possesses their own path towards enlightenment that will differ from the path of another. Nonetheless, there are common denominators, which create the suffering that is experienced within life. The goal in itself becomes to transcend the pain experienced and distance oneself from it. Within a wide range of belief structures, the practitioner begins to accept full responsibility for their thoughts, their emotions and their actions. Partial responsibility is also accepted for each trauma experienced. The notion becomes to separate oneself from situations, which cause internal grief or unfavourable circumstances. To not involve oneself in the drama of life, therefore allows one to become detached from it. One does no longer requires or even desires the drama that life brings, thus one simply removes the causal factors that trigger them by editing oneself out of the situation. Numerous yogis and sages have retreated to the mountains for decades before re-surfacing to the public within a state of Samadhi, otherwise known as the ultimate state of peace and enlightenment.
Sociopathy, now known as anti-social disorder, is generally a genetic condition that cannot be cured or mended. Only the individual can gain control of their inclinations in order to expand their understanding of others. Needless to mention, countless high functioning sociopaths have marked history beyond the point of return, especially within religious or spiritual professions. Whereas psychopathy prefers the long drawn out emotional pain in others, the sociopath has no preference. More often than not, the response of a sociopath is provoked into violence whilst the psychopath does not necessarily require a trigger event to victimise another. Most interestingly of all, the behavioural tendencies of a psychopath would not allow them to linger on a mountain for decades without human contact, whereas the sociopath would experience no care or consideration towards the task. Psychopaths and sociopaths, although it is a common misconception that they are increasingly alike, nothing could be further from the truth. The psychopath experiences an urge, a compulsion or a drive of some sort, generally speaking, whereas the sociopath does not. The most suitable analogy would perhaps be an emotional filter that is different from the average human being. The emotions are present within the sociopath, yet they are disconnected and in the background. Hence, a sociopath with anger management issues can become a rather clinically challenging subject. As sociopathy is a genetic condition, it affects the very core make-up of the individual. If pushed beyond a certain point, the sociopath cannot differentiate between a slight emotional outburst and the action of snapping a neck. It is a whiplash between extreme emotions that differs from bipolar disorder, as the sociopath experiences conscious choice of expression of emotions to a certain degree. In conclusion, the choice of detach oneself for sociopathy, similarly the development of the love-map for a rapist, occurs during childhood. It becomes a foundation stone in the mental development of the sociopath. Truth be told, there is very little distinction between the warrior monk and the sociopath in moments of extreme discontent. Both ways of living are mirror images of another. They are equal sides of the same spectrum, attempting to alter the circumstances, merely approaching the matter from opposing viewpoints. Ironically, they are increasingly alike. Both are triggered by the need of the soap opera within real life by other human beings. The unintentional or intentional creation of problems within daily life. Both also hold another aspect in common, a neutrality towards animals. The sociopath as well as the monk would prefer to focus on the owner of the animal that was trained to attack over the animal itself, whereas most other types of individuals focus less on the actions of the participants and more towards the action of the animal. However, for instance, whereas monks would prefer to prevent animal testing, urging for the animals to be released back into nature, sociopaths rather prevent the average citizen from applying products, which stem from the cruelty towards animals, via methods of social engineering. In essence, the mere difference between both approaches is the choice that is made to start with. The first choice that guides all other choices. For instance, the monk has the ability choose to distance himself instead of involving himself in altering society until society has changed itself or to risk changing it himself, whereas the sociopath is in favourable circumstances provided with the choice whether not to kill whilst altering society or not to kill and distance himself from society, whilst remaining at the core of it. The sociopath would through instinct choose to remain within society either way. Yet, the choice becomes whether to distance onself from society by whatever means necessary or to modify it by any means necessitated. Conversely, the monk chooses to separate himself from society by whatever means necessary until he chooses to alter society by any means necessitated. One can even go as far as to predict the behaviour of a monk by observing a sociopath, and vice versa. Yet, the first choice at all times determines the probabilities of choices that are to follow.

Related:

– Dating a Higher Functioning Sociopath – Part 3

– Non-Attachment & Depopulation

– Relationships in Times of Mass Extinction

– Heightism – The Rules Revisited