# Four Demons



## Abraxas (Apr 23, 2011)

I believe at this point of my life that the worse 'demons', the things that draw me away from happiness and wellbeing the most, are:

1) Analysis
2) Dialectics
3) Discoursive Thought
4) Philosophy

They relate to DPD. When I was DPD'ed these demons had a much stronger hold on me. Recovering had to do in some way or the other about dis-identifying with these mental processes/world-views.

I ll try to explain them, I hope it helps in any way, this also helps me clear my mind about same. You will see that the four of them revolve around one same burden/defect: the negation and consequent deprivation of that which is Organic.

About the word choice: Demons, I do not imply that there is a moral tint to them. Simply because these constructs turn one away from what is Real, from what is Organic, from Life, causing pain and suffering, in my view they embody true 'evil'.

1) Analysis
_From Wikipedia:_ "Analysis is the process of breaking a complex topic or substance into smaller parts to gain a better understanding of it."

There is nothing wrong in analysis as an intellectual tool per se. However when one begins to apply Analysis to experience, something odd happens. The process of breaking up experience into components, for example in the search of a suitable basis for 'Self', the "Where is my soul, where/what/who am I, in all of this", has the effect of disturbing the holistic nature of experience and Life itself.

In a simple mathematical model, the summation of parts should equal whole. One knows that, for example, when dis-assembling a watch and examining its parts, knowledge will be gained about the whole, about the summation of the parts, the way they interact, there hierarchies, orders, functions, etc, to create the whole. However when it comes to Life itself, there seems to be so much complexity to it, that any attempt in 'breaking it down' to components/parts, will most likely result in an incorrect model of reality, and hence any conclusion drawn from said model, will err. Modern Scientist are at the cutting edge of the madness of Analysis, trying to figure out what is the basic, smallest particle, that which you can not further divide, 'the building blocks of Life', the basic forces, etc, etc, and from those premises try to describe and understand the whole, the Subjective experience, Life itself.
And _Subjective_ here is the key word. While 'Object' can be split and divided into parts, Subject can not. there are no parts in Subject. To use Analysis as a tool for self-knowledge is some kind of paradox, as Analysis is the negation of that which is Organic, that which is in-divisible in the first place, ie Self/Life.

A concrete, extreme example: Some times I find myself dissecting my experience into parts, I even wrote pages on end about the components of my experience: sense perceptions, pleasure, pain, 'minds' eye, cognition, re-cognition, memory, mentation, projection, intuition, asociation, generalizations, contact, atention, discursive thought, passive imagination, active imagination, concentration, will, atraction, repulsion, etc, etc, etc.. and describing each one of them, their connections, say between intention and the mind's eye, between sense perceptions, recognition and projections, etc. What would happen is, I found that there were so many parts and so many possible interactions between different parts, that it would take not only days on end of observation but also extremely high organizing and intellectual skills to do the task and to be able to put the parts together in a model and be able to derive knowledge/conclusions about that system. 
And secondly, I found that every time I 'entered' this state of Analysis, my sense of self would go away. It would shatter, just like that, gone. What happens is that the experience, Life, the present moment, which is Organic in nature, is approached by an analytical mind, it is looked through the looking-glass of Analysis, division. Then Life is halted, and basis for Self is nowhere to be found, as I believe sense of Self to be equal to Life, to be Organic, in-divisible, whole. The act of looking for Self makes Self dis-appear.

*2) Dialectics*

From Farlex Dictionary:

1. The art or practice of arriving at the truth by the exchange of logical arguments.
2. The process especially associated with Hegel of arriving at the truth by stating a thesis, developing a contradictory antithesis, and combining and resolving them into a coherent synthesis.
3. A method of argument or exposition that systematically weighs contradictory facts or ideas with a view to the resolution of their real or apparent contradictions.
4. The contradiction between two conflicting forces viewed as the determining factor in their continuing interaction.

Basically, in dialectics, two opposing arguments/forces, are confronted to one another, weighed down, and a conclusion is reached, using logic, which leads to the refutation of one and the validity of the other, or to a synthesis between the two (thesis and antithesis).

So, what is wrong with this? "I am this, I am not this" "I am, I am not" "The universe is infinite, the universe is finite" "There is Life after Death, There is not Life after Death", etc. First of all, all arguments are simply opinions. Opinions about something that simply is; Experience. But most importantly, while one can not simply negate the duality in this world, and hence the possibility for opposing arguments to be held and discussed, it is the dialectic method itself which puts these opposing forces into conflict. How? again, by denying the organic present moment, which is always in absolute Synthesis. Only by negating the absolute nature of the Present moment, and comparing same with past, and projecting into future, do these opinions originate. The act of arguing for a, or for b, where a is opposite to b, 'reifies' (_To regard or treat (an abstraction) as if it had concrete or material existence_) a and b, when in reality the synthesis C, is all there is. Experience *IS the very synthesis *between the opposing forces. Everything in the present moment (experience, Life) is in synthesis, it could not be otherwise, only abstraction, which is the negation of that which is organic, reifies the thesis and antithesis and allows one to Argue for one or the other position, be it an intellectual, mundane, or metaphysical mater, for *a* or for *b*, in an endless, painful quest for total synthesis, which is only found by not arguing in the first place.

3) *Discoursive Thought*

_From Wikipedia:_ Discourse (from Latin discursus, meaning "running to and from") generally refers to "written or spoken communication or debate"

"I dont like this. I will go tomorrow to the store and have it changed for this other thing."

"I hope tomorrow will be a sunny day" "I cant wait for this to happen"

"What is happening with me? I didnt use to be like this"

The very etimology of the word makes the madness inherent to discoursive thought quite explicit: To run to and from. From a to b, from b to c, from c to d. From d back to b or a. This is this, then this other is this, then this will be this and this will not be this. then the other and this, and so on. ie. madness. The thinking mind (that which 'speaks' in language/words, is such a death-drive. It kills life, its kills experience, it kills self.

Why? words are *abstract* symbols, they are not organic, they can not be experienced. They simply point out to a memory or imagined experience. They are empty, soul-less. Now, when you engage in discoursive thought, what you do is you combine these symbols, which represent 'things' but _are not _those things, using logic, with words that are even more abstract but serve as bridges between the other symbols (like 'is', 'this'). All is good when you do this abstraction for things such as 'The blue ball'. Quite useful. But, when you start using words like 'I', 'you', 'Life', 'God', 'will', 'universe', 'world', 'present', 'past', 'who', 'where', etc, etc. The degree of separation, that is the distance between the symbol and that which it represents, is so disproportionate... the actual, Subjective experience of that thing being so far away from the symbol you use to represent it... the result of these thought-process is pure non-sense and confusion. Why, because not only are you converting things which are Organic into an abstract, dead form, but for most of these words you dont even have an actual, reliable EXPERIENCE to back them up, so what you get are symbols (words) for *concepts* which are devoid of essence, devoid of experience. You are interchanging meaningless sounds, thinking you know what you are talking about, but so out of tune from reality, that you start living in a fake world, a mental construct that only continues to live because the Logic is not broken. that is, the discourse is perfectly logical, the words combine perfectly, and what you think makes sense, and somehow you believe you are deriving wisdom or insight by engaging in such process. But you are not. When you talk about Life you kill Life, discoursive thought is really a death force. it drains energy. it is the true Devil, it transforms the organic and real into something abstract, into a construct. 
To be lost in discoursive thought is to be lost in abstraction, the negation of that which is Organic, the negation of Experience. The thinking mind is the true ego, the building of fake models of reality, maps which are not the territory. To engage in discoursive thought is to die. You run to and from, always running, never reaching your destination. Always postponing life.

4) *Philosophy*

_From Wikipedia:_ "Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.[1][2] It is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument"

From the previous three points its clear why I would think Philosophy is a demon. It is *Abstraction* taken to the extreme. Here I include all forms of Metaphysics and Religion.

When one makes an opinion about Life/Experience, life ceases to be. Because that opinion is based on an Asbraction of Life, and life is the opposite of Abstraction, it is Organic, it is Real. To construct an intellectual model of reality is to kill reality. A requisite for being a philosopher is to stop being, to renounce to life, to choose the Abstraction instead of the thing itself: Life. To read, think and worry about philosophy, metaphysics, religion, etc, is to kill the mystery, to kill the essence, to become lignified, to die, to destroy the Organic.

Anyway hope this helped or was at least interesting to some of you









Peace
Abraxas


----------



## Visual (Oct 13, 2010)

The extent of the effect of these 4 depends on how seriously one takes themselves. If these fan the flames of OCD or hypervigilance, then instability increases.

I am very analytical and have been learning to spend more time feeling. Yet merging the two is working well. It hasn't been necessary to dump analytical-ness. Analysis is a very useful tool, it just isn't a lifestyle or religion.

As for dialectics - this is how people interact without limiting their conversation to, "The weather is partly sunny this evening". Of course, it becomes harmful as one gets carried away with the ideas that their experience or views are the only valid ones.

Discursive thought (if I understand the right definition) involves disorderly thinking, lack of coherence, and "self-talk and rationalizations that we employ that take us out of the present moment and into the realm of 'longing and loathing'"

Again if understanding this one correctly, it would seem rather harmful. But to wish for tomorrow to be a better day isn't evil in itself. Many activists work to try to make tomorrow better for whales, elephants, birds, people&#8230;

Since emotion is a driving force, it has value even when less than comfortable.

"_Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. It is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument_"

How does one not form ideas or have opinions? How can it be healthy to have no opinions? Again the problem is one of flexibility and willingness to grow - to let others in your life even though they are different.  Willing to reshape opinions.

These 4 can be demons, but a real problem is the doubt about reality. Not 'feeling' reality is often a major component of DP/DR. If these 4 further confuse, then moving away from them is needed. Often living in the moment can be a stabilizing 'technique'.

This forum is very much about all four. And un-DP-ing involves interacting with the world around us - which is ever changing and controversial.

Perception is based on experiences. The brain works this way - whether you believe the brain is all, or it is merely a container with consciousness contained in the ventricles, the pineal, or someplace else.

Confusion and doubt about reality is experiencing everything without solid reference points (opinions) - things seem new and thus foreign/alien. When lots of things seem this way, it is fatiguing and can drive anxiety. Even those who cannot feel are disheartened by the lack of feeling their feelings.

Reestablishing familiarity and working through the oddness/surprise of stimuli is part of recovery - whether one systematically works toward this or gets there by living in the moment and a good vacation.

IMO, the main demons are lack of balance and flexibility. Learning to become 'grounded' is a foundation to stability.

If the above 4 drove your DP, then getting away from them would be helpful just as you report. And it is helpful that you have related your experience to us, thank you.


----------



## Abraxas (Apr 23, 2011)

Visual said:


> Confusion and doubt about reality is experiencing everything without solid reference points (opinions) - things seem new and thus foreign/alien. When lots of things seem this way, it is fatiguing and can drive anxiety. Even those who cannot feel are disheartened by the lack of feeling their feelings.


I think opinion differs from re-cognition. When you are familiar with something you dont necesarilly have an opinion of it, you just recognize it. I think it is the other way, having too much opinions about what Life is/ is not, or should be/should not be, is what makes us alienate from Life.

That is why i think Philosophy is a demon, specially foreign philosophy, philosophy from other people or other cultures, etc. Personal philosophy is better. No-Philosophy is best.

What do you think?

Anyway, thanks for replying , i enjoy this kind of conversation =)

Peace
Abraxas


----------



## gill (Jul 1, 2010)

Yeah, I think any kind of abstract thinking can be dissociative. But, I don't think that it's necessarily bad, that just depends on how someone uses it or is affected by it.


----------



## Visual (Oct 13, 2010)

*What do you think*

When first reading your post (#1), it struck me as odd/puzzling in that it seemed that in writing the post you were at the same time exhibiting these very demons - especially analysis and philosophy.

It does seem however, that many things just happen. One day an issue is no longer an issue - something changed inside. Too much fighting and struggle can end up being unproductive - like belligerence. Or worse, like quicksand.

While I do not 'worship' science and simple view it as a tool in our toolbox, I very much think that we are 'meaning making machines' and we 'construct percepts based on subjective experience'. These two statements reach the heart of what neuroscience has been learning. Whether people believe in existential dualism or not, we are more that _just effected_ by what the neurons do.

As a sidepoint, there is a lot of frustration and even anger at medical science because they have not discovered cure(s) for DP. But one might as get mad at weathermen and geologists because they can't prevent tidal waves and tornadoes. Everything is in its infancy.

*because synthesis does not happen in the rational mind*

In some sense this appears true. In spite of viewing ourselves as being so very logical, we are far more emotional. Our brain's 'executive center' is driven by our emotions - and cannot even function without emotion. Learning and memory depend on emotion. And much is driven by 'reward' circuitry.

*Desires, wishes, motivations, intentions, dreams, feelings, etc.. do not depend on discoursive thought*

There is a balance between: chill out, let things happen < --- > make goals and work toward them

Emotions ARE life. Intellect is a way to guide them to success. And success is in some sense, self-defined. Thus reality is individualistic/personal. And it is a growing process to interface smoothly with the realties of others.

*I think opinion differs from re-cognition*

Perhaps the term 'percept' is better than 'opinion' but is isn't so commonly used or understood. But the idea/concept is understood.

*The problem comes when your opinion about reality and Self replaces reality and Self.*

We all experience being too opinionated both from outside and within. It takes effort and practice to consider other's opinions and learn that it doesn't threaten self. Arrogance is actually fear/insecurity. For a truly 'grounded' person doesn't 'need' others to believe them. And they are freer to examine life without spiraling into some sort of instability.

There are a number of accounts on this forum demonstrating that a collapse of ones belief system can cause a catastrophic tailspin.

It is especially challenging to regain balance while spinning - much more that growing and learning from a stable position.

Many on the forum suffer the feeling of unreality, whether self or the world. It would seem that part of a 'cure' is learning that learning reality is ok. That reality is a percept that will grow. If nothing else, it reduces anxiety.

As for those who simply don't feel their feelings at all - with some this may be a protective mechanism. But for others, the mechanism is 'latched' for more 'neurological' reasons.

If there is a single most important thing for DPer to do, it would be to socialize with people who are largely 'positive' and provide acceptance and respect. This outside platform can help one to reestablish their own inside platform on which to stand. And if nothing else, it feels better.

Well, enough frog philosophy &#8230; best wishes to the forum


----------



## Abraxas (Apr 23, 2011)

Visual said:


> When first reading your post (#1), it struck me as odd/puzzling in that it seemed that in writing the post you were at the same time exhibiting these very demons - especially analysis and philosophy.


hehe true. i knew before i wrote the thread that it would be like a man talking about the benefits of silence








i was trying to show the defects/weaknesses of these methods from within. i guess if i could post a feeling or state of mind it would be better


----------

