Philosophy – “Of Pride and Egotism” – 6/5/2021

“An excuse can be set for the matter in which one feels prideful, when one has committed no action for the feeling of it. It would be the foulest of sensations to boast, especially within earshot of those aided, of the noble actions one has taken in the name of self-sacrifice.”

Modern Romanticism

For nobility, one does not take to the gain for the self. For the occurrence of self-sacrifice, one knows its difference from loss. One places themselves, through humility, at the level of those who have lost, to then raise them at the cost of the self. It is to sacrifice, where a person does not lose out of the sensation of grief. One sacrifices, because it was no choice to do so. One does this, because another needed the material substance more than the self.

It is the prideful individual who believes themselves capable of all. It is them who cannot fathom the idea that they cannot be indestructible. For it requires the certain necessity of dropping one’s own pride, to the notion that they require aid. That is individualism, in the finest sense of the word.

Individualism is the swallowing of pride, for the greater sensation to another’s care that one would be relieved by. Though, to prideful sorts, they are not so much to believe they are incapable.

Then, what is a human? Are we not imperfect, enough for the comprehension of it? We are, because to our mistakes, and then in our admittance that we have caused one, is to how we both mature through life’s education of pain. Pain is thus tolerated for the sake of individualist education. Then, it is to the prideful person who must believe they should remain ignorant, never to admit they were wrong of a decision.

How does a person learn, if not willing to sacrifice what was not needed? How does a person know what they need, versus what is a convenience? Humility is the place of self-sacrifice. Whereas, it is pride that will keep to the self, in the notion that one does not deserve the criticism that would deconstruct.

One should be prideful for accomplishment, for this compares to action. Whereas, one should be humble for who one is, in the knowledge that an action can become an excuse to build one’s own ego. When ego builds, a person does not sacrifice. They keep, because they are always afraid to lose.

Paupers are to this regard, as always meaning to keep what is left when they have lost enough. It should then be fathomed of those deemed as victimized for the encouragement of a prideful mindset, that such sorts will never know what it means to learn. Their pride, along with their refusal to admit to their wrongs, cultivates the perpetual state of ignorance even among the chaos in what they feel.

Short Prose – 250 Words – “It Depends what you See” – 2/14/2021

Everything. It depends on the eyes. What do you see, when you look at myself?

What do the Autumn leaves comprehend of Autumn? What do the fallen understand of the beauty in that arrangement of colors? Fire is what leaves a trail of decay. Scattered debris, a teeming season of fossils, as you can indeed look at me as just another leaf.

Have I fallen? No one will raise me, if I have.

When I picked you up, I showed my strength. I showed colors.

Though, upon this time, have I decayed? Do I show no colors? Am I merely the leaf who cannot comprehend the Autumn, of that arrangement of beauty?

I’d be a sparkle drifting from your hair, or a drop of moisture from your shoulder. I’d be a smile fading into a frown.

Of every ocean I have cried to create, I’d be just another droplet among the rest. I’ll be a remainder, not a reminder. As no hero walks his path, without eventual departure, love only conflicts. Love restricts the freedom, binds the limbs, keeps the mind burdened by focus.

As more lies can be creative than the truth, I cannot stop without knowing the latter. To look through your eyes, advance to winter, to become not a fallen leaf, though as a passing chill of wind, I might remind you, and only you, of what I was. A child, becoming a man, to soon descend to a former immaturity. Though, in your mind, I could perhaps be raised.

Chapter Three – Part III – “Defeat for Self-Love” – From “The Disregarding of Science to the Mind” – 1/8/2021

Love for the self does not dig deep, for no person can empathize with themselves. If one has no comprehension for what one struggles with, then this supposed “self-love” will linger upon the exterior, because it is the same as finding comfort in deception. Deception or self-deception, with the latter being the chosen usage of description for this, is how a person applies “self-love” to their appearances. In refraining from believing themselves hideous, they only not judge nor shame who they are, because this sort of love is always false. That is due to such a deception upon the self cannot ever be the judgement that understands. Love is a judgement, being one that entertains to the deeper and more concealed parts of another human being. It is then always what is not of us, being of others, where empathy extends itself.

When a person relies on identification for the self, comprehends this as the only way for them to be proud, then they have automatically renounced empathy. Their loss of humanity, by this regard, is due to the refusal of coinciding “identity” with that of another person. As it is, each person who solely wishes to identify as themselves, in believing this uniqueness defines or redefines themselves, have been lost on all levels of empathy.

It is that empathy is the identification upon someone else, to see one’s own reflection in another as a way to understand that hurt is the same, by all walks of life. If such people of their “self-identification” ideology could ever comprehend the idea behind identifying with another, they’d regain their touch with empathy. Due to not being in such a mindset of empathy, their only path is the one of the narcissist.

If a person rejects judgement, then they reject love or the genuine care and concern offered by someone else. Thus, by this rejection, trust has also been refused. From this, trust breaks, and division is the causation to which two people cannot unite in the creation of it.

A chaotic heart is always something which displays itself by misused trust, broken vows, and the sheer abandonment of one’s nobility. One has wanted a choice, and what comes from this is always the chaos that never relates to objectively correct actions. To be “objectively correct” in what one does, is to never have a choice, pertaining here to how a person who possesses genuine care for another person. They feel no choice but to help them. They point out a flawed person’s issues, out of care.

Because of the rejection of such “judgement”, that flawed person rejects love. This becomes the “self-love” through which a person places upon external or appearance-wise matters of themselves. It is again to wonder on how a person can empathize with themselves, when a person who claims to love themselves only cares for what they can instantly understand. It always takes more contemplation to understand the deeper and more embedded faults. However, such a period of contemplation will not come quick enough, if such issues are deconstructing an individual with more swiftness. This is to say that “self-love” may perhaps regenerate what is damaged outside of the person, so that a good appearance can attract better friendships. Are the betterment to these new friendships, only the result of lacking empathy? As an example, those who smoke surround themselves with others who do the same. Nothing of empathy, even in such an example, would result in the digging out of those deeper matters. It is this, if all a person of “self-love” does is bury their concerns even further by continuing to tend to the outside.

It must be the case, that when a person has no outside empathy given towards themselves, their only option becomes to tend to what is damaged, externally. How does external and physical healing bring about the reveal of what perhaps is not being opened up to others? There are those who adopt a mask, as this becomes the new “identity” for a supposed “hero” who claims to have become the “person they were hiding from”. Of superheros within comics, could it be said that their heroism is a divide between what they truly are within, and who they are pretending to be on the outside? This would make their costume and mask the mere lie, while their true identity has yet to be revealed.

Who could understand the superhero, empathize with or perhaps even save them from inner turmoil? By the same example, how does a superhero who repairs their costume after a battle still live up to the truth of who they are, within themselves, without still constantly burying that pain?

Unity has no partake of commonality without identified common factors, as empathy has no way to dig without comparison in what underlies all the overlying stains.

Philosophy – “Why to be Humble for Identity” – 1/6/2021

“Sinister is the one who gains a high on their own self, while their actions are left to the negligence of others. To be proud for identity is no different than your average historical dictator, who through his own pride to his idealist nature, found that others shamed what he did which either was to the negligence or outward brutality upon his people.”

– Modern Romanticism

What defines the monster? It is the he who neglects or is brutal, while also possessing a prideful self in the mannerism of narcissism. The narcissist only ever looks upon reflections of similarity. They do not see, nor just wish, to find interest in another’s viewpoint. Similarity attracts the narcissist to either the literal mirror, or to the reflection within a pair of eyes where they see wholly themselves.

Humility for the self, does not generate narcissism. For if a soldier can be boastful of who they saved, it would be no different than this “pride culture” of those who take to the highness of themselves by believing someone owes them something. If a soldier boasts proudly about who they saved within earshot of the person whose life was nearly gone, that latter person would hold a sense of guilt in them. That is because there is no repayment to a life saved. Therefore, to the prideful people in this world for their identity, how are they heroes? How can a hero be boastful for non-selfless acts, if they weren’t just selfish?

Selflessness is heroism. To be prideful for nothing more than one’s own identity, will leave all action to the negligence of it. We cannot love, if we are not heroes. And, we cannot be heroes, if we cannot be humble for who we are, within the presence of those we have saved through our love.

Philosophy – “Identity Politics, the same as Monarchal Bloodlines” – 9/12/2020

“Written in the ways of purism, is the idea that one blood is inferior, or lacking in quality, over another. To base politics around race, around gender, around creed, is to recede to the aristocracy mentality, though swapped. It is to say that impurity is purity. Perhaps it is that we are all the same, though not in the way everyone wants.”

– Modern Romanticism

Who is pure, in this world of worlds? Who can say whether one person has more in-depth understanding to their “self-discovery”, over another? Who is purer, to another, whose bloodline, whether crossed or stagnant, is only ever different?

It can continually return to the idea that a person, whose bloodline is only different, can be made brand new. Of a bloodline, brand new, it is the same as a bloodline, pure. It is the same as to see something more divisive than any aristocrat, who had power in the past, could make for competition’s sake. For do these people with their “identity” not relate to very obscure bloodlines, so alien from the common man?

All a person knows, so well of themselves, is that they can bleed, just like anyone else.

“Identity politics” is, therefore, an exact relation to aristocracy, in terms of the curiosity for the potency of blood. We can comprehend our ancestry, through a simple “Google search”. Whereas, in the past, we knew it by whoever had sexual intercourse with a woman. We can dig so deep in the past, to discover our identity’s “potential”, and then, become proud of who we are. For to be proud of who we are, is no different than any tyrant who would want to appear good, rather than do good.

The love of blood, is the love of making a statement. And, when do we become the vampires, who like Elizabeth Bathory, drenched herself in a virgin’s own? We do so, by accumulating newness. We make new bloodlines, discovering percentages of ourselves in our supposed “ancestry”. Again, in the pride of who we are, we forget to be proud for what we can do. That makes us ruling tyrants, that without the offered shame for this identity, we can conceal guilt.

People can be wounded, not of guilt, though for pride. Though, whenever will we give in, to a guilt that tells us we have bled others, for the sake of keeping what we most know of ourselves? We have bled other people’s pride, not ever giving in to this guilt we know we feel. Because, for how sour an aristocratic person’s expression can be, we overlook our guilt for how much we bleed. We put to death, another person and their supposed guilt, whether at the stake or at the hanging. To burn, or to choke, is the only punishment a person with a supposed sin, can receive.

It is to those that know we all bleed, that make those who are so vain for their identity, released of their head from their shoulders. Yet, they’ll still run around without intelligence, without recognition, and without identity. Because, as they believe in blood, the rest believes in sameness. The common man believes in same blood, same identity.

Consume the offered shame. Feel your inner guilt. Punish yourself.

Quote – “Why Beauty Matters” – Pt. 2 – 8/11/2020

“Could one know a person beyond the surface? Of course. Then, why make it a priority to discuss the surface? Why make it a priority to discuss race? Why not make it a priority to discuss something deeper? Something of culture, something of history, being the things that one could identify or relate to another for. That makes personal union, not the ignorance of a person that would cause the feeling of fear.

For to remain on the surface would spark that fear, that dread of being close.”

– Modern Romanticism

Quote – “Why Identity Pride is Pointless” – 7/5/2020

“There is a statement: to be proud for what you can do, and to be humble for who you are. Though, what if this was reversed? What if people were proud for who they are, and they were humble about what they can do? Does this not feed into negligence for actions, and then also a continuous demand for ‘acceptance’ in the name of that identity?

Negligence will be of the person too siphoned into their pride for who they are, because in their humility for what they can do, they are lazy.

How many dictators and how many other tyrants of the past, were more humble for what they can do, more lazy and more neglecting of others, to be proud of who they were?”

– Anonymous

Quote – “Humanity is…” – 6/29/2020

“Humanity is always beneath Hell. Were a human to express humanity for its own sake, we’d all be God. We’d all be one. We’d have no need to divide, based on that Hell, based on what we don’t see. Hell is something constructed atop humanity. It is because a person’s pain extends into their actions upon what they despise. Humanity is pain. Hell is the cause of that pain. Everything burns when we are in pain, internally and externally. Love sees humanity. And, love forgives humanity. Pain comes together to heal, not as pain extending into Hell upon another, though as love extending to heal another person’s pain.

In essence, love sees beneath Hell, to the humanity of a person, being their pain, being their origin or identity.

We are all in pain for where we begin, unknown of the world, and unknown of others. We are ignorant, as an identity. Though, we are never blissful in Hell. We are blissful when we are loved, as Heaven is indeed portrayed.”

– Anonymous

Quote – “The Issue of Pride” – 6/27/2020

“Pride, in terms of identities, has only influence in egotism. For what is pride, in terms of identity? It is the pain of an individual, for each person’s beginning is saturated in the pain of labor. Work caused the blood to spill from the hands, by way of the creation to a foundation, while further work is done to spread the knowledge to that foundation for future generations. All beginnings, are soaked in pain. Therefore, create pride in terms of identities, and one has created pain after pain, which is division after division. What deserves to be named for ‘art’, is the expression that comes from the pain, made to heal that pain. Art is made to forget a past, because an identity is only ever the past, the pain, and the division of origin.

When a person is high upon their own pain, they are high upon their own ego, blind to being identified as being like another person. It is because a person’s pain could be another’s pain, though such people’s love of uniqueness makes them not want to identity with someone else. That forms their division. An origin may be different, though it is the same when all hold hands to go past it.

Such people for their identity desire stature, before achievement. They are stuck in their past, their pain, with no expression, and no future.”

– Anonymous

Philosophy – “The Falsehoods of Pride” – 6/23/2020

“Where one should be proud for their deeds, one should be humble for what such actions make the committed person.”

– Anonymous

It is true in the statement that pride is meant for action, for deeds, for the noble actions that were held of having no choice. One can be internally proud as a hidden pride, in doing right for another, though one should never boast about selflessness. As in, one should never speak so highly about what one has done for another, if they mean to be humble for those selfless deeds. Within earshot of that person, it will make the helped individual appear powerless.

One inevitably humbles themselves, through selflessness, through love. One does not, in fact, humble themselves in direct respect to pride upon their own identification. For that means they are not humble for who they are, as they have not done anything worthwhile for another person.

Pride, for identification, is the epitome of selfishness. For that is because selfishness is defined to be being proud in terms of Sloth, of laziness, of no action. In that sense, one has always desired a choice. Because, to be selfless, means to not have had a choice. For those we love, do we ever say that we had a choice in helping them? To love, is never a choice. For if love is defined as light, then it is just as fast in its enactment, through selfless deeds.

Love does not boast itself, as it always humbles itself upon what noble deeds make the individual selfless person. For one will have a toxic mindset, were they to say for selflessness, that they should be uplifted for those noble and selfless deeds. In being selfless, a person has uplifted another. In being selfish, a person has uplifted themselves.

One should indeed be humble for themselves, and proud for their selfless deeds. Though, that pride should not come about as a boast. It should, in fact, be seen in the eyes of the person, helped. By seeing them in their better state, their better condition, the selfless one comprehends the helped one as the proud one. For it is not that the selfless person did all the work for those they helped. They merely showed the path to those they aided.

Therefore, pride will remain as the toxicity of believing it pertains to identification. This means that a person “proud for their identity”, is a person who believes themselves to have a choice. That is, they have not ever committed to a lack of freedom, a lack of a choice, where a person will inevitably do right for another. They have always reasoned themselves out of being responsible, to take up what is needed for external factors, unrelated to having a choice.

Quote – “The Only Definition of Diversity” – 6/7/2020

“Diversity must be defined as stemming from knowledge over one’s own culture, traditions, and ways. Diversity cannot be departed from tradition, as that would go against the belief in new ideas. To define diversity as related to what already is diverse about a world, will cause this definition to adhere to a cycle of repetition. It is there when quality is erased, because one, through that definition, had only ever focused on numbers, on groups, never the truth or originality that could be expressed as an art form from these diverse people. Therefore, through such a focus on ‘existing diversity’, not on new ideas from tradition, one has a focus on deception, because deception is always opposite from originality. That is because the newness in ideas are going to uphold an origin without a primary focus upon it. One needs not to focus on who they are, when they can focus primarily on the preservation of it only by the introduction of new ideas.

It is in strength that a preservation is made, because one can comprehend that their origin cannot be entirely lost when they merge it, and their traditions, with a new expressive idea.

In the focus on sheer identity of a person, one rejects newness in ideas, one rejects criticism to better those new ideas. Identity cannot be created, as much as one can only dismantle their traditions into disorder, and represent only that.

Without expression that stems from tradition, and without newness in ideas that stems from the same, a person is only ever ‘diverse’ in a manner where they’re mass produced as the same result.”

– Anonymous