WILD WRITE. About polarities & further associations.

3년 전

gifs provided by: http://gph.is/1PKH7YB - giphy.com

Since I heard about the polarities and a middle way of looking at the psychological streams of us humans and wanting to live by it, approaching the highest and avoiding the low, I cannot help but examine everything I read and search for statements where someone sticks to one pole or another. So the enthusiastic hymn of praise and the depressing condemnation of human activity is something that ignores the middle way for me and quite reliably bumps past reality.

Enthusiasm is therefore something that I meet with a certain skepticism, just like the leaden heaviness of gloom.

I romanticize nature on one side and demonize it on the other.

Neither is true. Nature - the uncultivated and uncivilized space where flora and fauna thrive without human influence - is unintentional and neither evil nor cheerful. Apart from that I lack experience, because I have never entered a jungle far away from civilization. But being a human being and seeing my tendency to attribute a human quality to things, I feel particularly addressed when something is exaggerated or understated. Why is that so?

Probably the habit and influence of civilization plays a very large role. We humans love drama and comedy. Here again I find this polarity. What could we love or hate that is in the middle? The middle seems to be a boring place where nothing of importance happens. Many confuse such a middle existence with passivity and indifference. And in this field of faintness it seems as if you are nothing and as if you have nothing to deal with.

But I still can enjoy a drama but don't have to stick myself to it. I can march the street and demonstrate for what I believe is true without attaching myself to the wish that someone gives me a nobel prize or meaning. Maybe the greatest things in life I did are those I cannot remember but find their memory in the minds of others without letting me know.

It's difficult, no? To find a balance when vanity kicks in.

Are health and illness two opposing poles?
If so, what's in between? I would say that these are two abstract terms that cannot be defined precisely. Only in the experience space of absence of health (physical and mental well-being) do I know what makes me feel sick - and vice versa. It is not a polarity but rather that "health" cannot be examined as a noun, but only as an aspiration rather than a desire to be healthy. If I overdo it and focus on my desire to be healthy, what could be the consequence of this overdoing? One possibility would be that I react to everything sick and become hypochondriac by meticulously starting to pay attention to symptoms. What I lack then is confidence in my self-healing powers - mentally and physically.

Conversely, the carelessness of not worrying about any symptoms or acknowledging that my human body and mind are susceptible to disease and that I am better able to resist the beginnings and take care of them when I notice signs of physical and mental discomfort.

Therefore, a sister quality of "looking after health" would be a form of moderate mindfulness that neither fearfully exaggerates recognizable symptoms nor carelessly pushes them aside. Exactly these two negative qualities create a space of tension in which I move and have the choice between a desert march in incandescent heat and an ice bath in freezing cold. It's obvious that I can't stand this kind of movement within these two spaces for long. The tension would kill me in a short time.

It is better to move in a space that keeps the balance between tension and relaxation and does not let me gnash my teeth on one side and melt like a warm pudding with my cosy bed on the other.

In my counselling with young people I sometimes apply this point of view when I hear: "I am totally stressed!" Then I ask them how tense they walk through the day with a protective shield to show no flanks, to assert themselves in their encounters, to collapse on their sofa afterwards, exhausted after this mental shielding. I get surprised reactions like I'm a brilliant mind reader. But of course: Everyone knows that if you are stretched too much like a tensioned spring, the spring becomes so worn out that you can hardly use it anymore. It's the mentioning of this polarities what appears "brilliant" - the use of language and meaning. We people learn well with extremes.

I hear people get crazier and crazier all the time.

And I believe it too. What else are you gonna do? The fact is, in the past, only people who didn't work out in the fields could afford a psychosis.

We modern, through Internet connected people, are the aristocrats of the past, yet I do not see myself as an aristocrat as I have some stereotypish pictures in mind of a lady in the roaring Twenties driving an old-timer or a mistress in the 17th century at the kings palace (thanks to books and films). But I live indeed the life of kings & queens as I can eat strawberries in winter and I can drive to the airport, enter a plane and take off to Honululu. If that is not something not even an emperor from the past couldn't do, I don't know what title I should give myself. ... do you know a name for me?

But still I behave sometimes like I am a victim of higher evil forces that do want to "enslave" me.

Well, think about this out-casting of reality.

I looked around. I was in search for someone to enslave me. Nobody appeared. Neither my income givers (I work as a freelancer) nor my colleagues nor the policemen and women I meet in the streets nor the governmental workers in the offices, nor the tax guys I talk to. They seem to be pretty ordinary people and I can see no evil creepy creatures departing their bodies. My government may be seen as people wish. But if I were a politician I would collapse in front of the given complexity and for sure I would have many many blind spots and the responsibility on my shoulders would be really heavy to carry - even more so under the eyes of ever present being media (sharks? really?). Give me Millions but I wouldn't want to do the job of a politician.

Once the "slave talk" is not so much in focus and instead the critical feedback will have its impact, how would you and I then perceive the world? Aren't we in a loop?

After looking back at my life and realizing that I had everything a human being could ask for I wonder why I am sometimes miserable. Oh, and than it dawns on me again: I am a modern person. I am influenced by a morphic field, I stay in resonance to other human beings. ... Do I?

Let me take another polaritiy:

Deep waters versus superficial puddles

I am talking about human encounters, of course. ... But another thought pops into my mind. ... Back then, it is years ago, a certain German TV-show started to take place. It was something with "Stefan Raabs television show". This was the first format to my knowledge which searched only the realm of media and lived off the things which TV broadcasted. I remember how strange I found that. ... A TV-show which only dealt with what is on TV?

Virtual reality mirrors virtual reality?

Today it is so common to surf the net and quote and investigate whats on the broad cast that it lacks alienation and became ordinary. The snob in me found that show utterly disgusting also because I thought to have found that there were these inserted artificial laughters which I knew from low quality soap operas (I know guys - I really don't want to insult Al Bundy - just ignore that).

Nowadays everyone makes his own show and I am kind of happy that I was able to watch the pioneer years where I could experience open source, generosity and the upcoming movements which always can be seen when something new and unexplored is exposed to more than just a small group of people. Now the formerly pirate formats became what the formerly TV production companies were:

they transformed into the same thing.

Alright. I live in a capitalistic world and that is reality. I witnessed an open door and had entered a realm of not having been discovered. Now this door is going to be kind of closed as things develop towards normality in the sense of consumption and advertisement.
That is reality. Things start out small and special, become bigger and after some time goes by they transform and eventually will go down again. It's all a matter of time.

But beat me, I also think that this is wanted by the people and forces. I mean do you really think we would live in a world like this if not a relevant majority prefers to do so? Please wait before you answer and contemplate about it.

I've seen that more than once happening. It's a universal law.

Maybe that is a good closing expression for I decide to stopp now as I notice that my thoughts are starting to fade away and my focus begins to be blurry on the edges.

Everything will pass. Enjoy, feel the pain and then let go of it.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  trending

Of course I strive for balance as so many of us do and that place in the middle seems most desirable in keeping our sanity, but I have always been accused of elongating my drawings, being hyperbolic in my writings and probably taking myself and others too seriously.
Your post makes me think about jumping on a trampoline and how it becomes more exciting the greater the leaps--really high and hitting down hard and how both together increase that space in between.
Even as a child, I liked to use my crayons in a careful way, covering all of the white with specific, solid colors (no scribbling outside of the lines), but then I liked to take my black crayon and outline every edge because it seemed to make the entire picture pop--so much more brilliant.
And as a writer, or photographer, I might see and/or hear much, but I don't take a picture of all, only those images that stick out starkly because they're what catch my eye eve though I know the in between spaces bolster these.
I do agree we are living like kings and queens, entirely rich in our time to think and think and think and that thinking grows new psychological flora and fauna, but who is to say "psychosis," is a weed and not someone discovering the colors at an ever expanding edge?


As artists the polarities are needed for showing a certain message. Without the outer edges the message would be weak. So writing in extremes is a teacher.

I like the trampoline analogy.

Once I was told that I always had such high-flying ideas and how it could only be that I always throw myself so into certain topics and one could not understand why I could dedicate myself to such a thing at all. I should be glad that nothing worse had happened to me and that I was still alive. HaHa, that looks familiar, doesn't it? However, the message is correct, but the sound was discordant. The one who gave me this lesson and with whom I was at odds had a lack of attention to complain about and was annoyed that I appeared so fond of myself.

She was right in a way, because the part that always revolves around myself can become unhealthy for me if I'm not careful. So the others take care of me and correct if I am too far away from the path.

The essence of her judgement pointed me in the right direction, but her anger at what I allowed myself indicated that she did not allow herself to take what I took.

The outer end of the psychotic flora is an excellent place to see, but bad for lingering.

The more I look into the abyss, the more intensively the abyss looks back.


Yes, I agree that it's definitely good to have others calling us back away from edges we might get lost in. And, also, like you write, to recognize that other's are projecting their own fears and anger towards us.
I suppose we are all mirroring one another so that we might see what we are unable to ourselves.

Yikes... although its been late last night, I entered the link to your post, so it would be the first thing I'd see on my tablet in the morning. Goes to show you,what a risk taker I am. That opening gif made me quite dizzy... think I should fix myself a strong coffee before I go on...
Interesting subject, as I deal with it in m work a lot too. Plus, what I find interesting as well, is the amount of new posts I find here... quite a few for someone who... ahm... stopped... ah posting? Hehe.. so fits you. I love it, how you ignore rules. Even your own 😎
I don't find myself torn between the " extremes", being a Libra after all. To me, they only define the space inbetween. Plus I'm sort of old school... analog so to speek. My world isn't made up of ones and zeros of the digital age, I like the wild growth of everything between black and white. And I'm not talking about the (boring) gray (as most people think), as in fact, there is the whole (visible) spectrum between them.
I don't know if its human nature to go for the extremes or if it is the media that promotes that in their greed for attention. To get the clicks, you have to be ever more extreme, so yes, you either walk on fire (in high heels), or have your head frozen in a block of ice to be interesting today and that is why the beautiful space inbetween is less and less perceived by people... and why their fuses blow eventually...
From what I know, our perception is based on curiosity and comparison. Experiments have proven, that even babies get bored with what they know and that they always focus on something new. After a few thousand years of human history, there's been a lot of new. In some areas, new means more extreme, ever pushing the envelope... with our perception based on comparison, we can only see light, when its surounded by dark. Try to paint light on a white paper! That is why I think we need to at least know and understand the to opposing extremes. Again, the problem comes in, when people no longer perceive the space in between... but who knows, maybe that is, what the industry and modern day propaganda wants us to be... blind for the beautiful garden with entrance free!


Thank you to follow my invitation (or my begging for attention:)

HaHa!! I hoped to hypnotize you by that gif, so I could make you doing things I want you to do and think. lookevil

Yes, there is a lot inconsistency to be found in me. Principles are best shown by breaking them. Now you can point your finger at me and I humbly take it. Twinkle.

Interesting and very true, your approach as what people get used to, what formerly was extreme now becomes ordinary. Yes, I agree hundred percent that that is the case with us humans. Once you tasted the worlds best wine you cannot fall for a lesser one. ... as long you are not stranded on a deserted island and a bucket of water tastes even better.

So the extreme shifts to here and there. I guess, media cannot be more extreme as it already is (I know, you will say it can). Now it is on the path to become ordinary and really cheap. At least for me in some cases but not in others.

But it takes always two: The shower and the watcher. You became in that moment a sovereign when you stopped watching news or immunized yourself from what is being displayed. As much as possible. Other people will want to drag you to listen what's new. LOL! Than you got yourself to become immune of that.

When extremes become desirable and are shown as models than the ordinary man, who actually walks indeed in the middle and does experience whats in between becomes dissatisfied with that middle ground. To pick up a flower can be an extremely profound experience.

Now, I would lie when I would say that picking up a flower is of much interest to me. But other, simple things, are indeed giving me that insight. I guess, that if I compare myself to my fellows I often see that friends or colleagues have greater needs in material things whether my needs are more of mental ones as feeling connected to people. But also appreciating a fine dinner as I don't have it that often and don't take it for granted. So a fine dinner is an extreme experience to me because I dwell in every bite.

That does not make me a better person. It only shows that I am somewhere on that scale with plenty of space next to me.

Nah, propaganda does not get us, no? Thing is there is so much out there that it hardly can be distinguished as such.

First: good to haven you back and read of your thoughts again<3

And now a little protest: Extremes are relative. For me. Extremes, the black and white, the good and bad are just as well opposites from another than the dark grey and the lighter grey. The middle (way) seems to exist only in theory like the arrow never hits the tree (or does it?) To encounter polarities means to notice the discriminative forces of human thought. I sometimes try instead of walking a middle way (which seems to be only a way of smaller polarities) to perceive the world in qualities which are dependent from one another. Instead of “this is black and that is white” (or sick/healthy, young/old, and so on) I try to see that one is darker and the other lighter. So, I can distance myself from thoughts which are based on fixed descriptions, then the assumed black could be perceived not as one end of the colour range, but only a dark colour where there might be darker colours (at another time or place).
And as ever my thoughts are not easily transformed in English and into writing. Hopefully I wrote something meaningful – if not, rest assured… I really wanted to :-DDD
And yes I read the whole post, but I got cough by the polarities (or the first hypnotizing gif... who knows)
Thank you for writing again!


Thanks to have YOU back! I missed your comments of quality - I mean it!

I see no protest but actually agreement and a deeper understanding of what's the middle. It can stretch itself broadly to both sides and delivers a variety of shades. What would you have without the extremes? You said it: "To encounter polarities means to notice the discriminative forces of human thought". Yes, that is how it can be approached.

... may I ask what happened when you read my sentence that I either demonize or romanticize nature? Or asked differently: What happens when I apply that to a human being? When I was about to tell you that the fight with your man points you to demonize him (hating him in this very moment of anger) or after you fell freshly in love with a man that you romanticize him?

If you wouldn't perceive the very outer edge of a thing, like the whitest white and the blackest black, how could you then come more close to the middle tones, like a very dark grey, a medium dark and a light dark? When you would have the task to paint a room in medium green, how could you know what's medium? You need a definition and you need a paint which matches this definition. The wider the polarities are apart from another the better. Otherwise the middle would not offer much variations.

Polarities are good for learning and to show something to experience, aren't they? I like to use them for exaggeration.

If I would ask you to show me the highest being the utmost important role model of us humans. To what would you point? Which characteristics would you like to put onto this entity? And what would be the most evil and dark creature you can think of? Where would you like to place yourself in that picture?

Yes, it's mostly a theoretical concept and method to teach a thing.


I am a little hungry, so I will answer shorter than I should/want... (and I still think talking would be so much easier :-DDD and the English ... oh sigh)
Although in making art (regardless of the medium) I tend to show drama, wish for tears, and want to facilitate katharsis, I seldom think in opposing/extreme categories or maybe for me there is always something behind an extreme, which will be even more extreme. In the heat of a fight I surely can feel intense feelings, but I seldom think about them as presenting the truth nor the end of the line. I mostly perceive objects/subjects linked with their context. Neither is nature good nor bad for me (regardless if I experience pleasant or unpleasant feelings). My thoughts mostly wander into questions of 'where or when did a specific concept of "nature" arise? Which cultural or historical circumstances formed this view of "nature". And amidst of the dangerous jungle I still have those thoughts, but they are pushed into the background till all threats are gone.
The same goes with people. As said above I am far from being enlightened and I can vehemently defend my (often faulty) opinion... but for me there are no completely bad or good people (which does not mean I like everyone... noooo). It is hard for me to have an idol, also it is hard for me to hate someone. There are people who show traits I think are helpful in specific circumstances (but not in all circumstances) A being which is all-good is not thinkable by me, perhaps I am a bit limited in this area. The idea of a highest being triggers too many questions for me .....the most important question would be the definition of "good" of the "highest"... good for whom and when? Who is the observer and delivers the verdict if the action was good? Will it stay good? Is a being which is bound in time even capable of owning a limitless/extreme quality? Am I capable of understand a highest being? Why should there generally be a linear development of qualities, isn't this only the way my limited brain tends to interpret qualities/ the world?
oh noooo, I cannot stop to ask questions :-DDDD
I better go and cook dinner :-D


I hope, your dinner tasted well :-D
thanks for engaging with me.

Yes, drama symbolizes strongly humanly feelings to an extent which moves and shakes us. It's a stylistic device. We wouldn't want to see a movie or read a book where nothing in particular happens. It also shows us how not to act when arousing times hit us. Learning through bad examples.

In the heat of a fight I surely can feel intense feelings, but I seldom think about them as presenting the truth nor the end of the line. I mostly perceive objects/subjects linked with their context. Neither is nature good nor bad for me (regardless if I experience pleasant or unpleasant feelings). My thoughts mostly wander into questions of 'where or when did a specific concept of "nature" arise? Which cultural or historical circumstances formed this view of "nature". And amidst of the dangerous jungle I still have those thoughts, but they are pushed into the background till all threats are gone.

Beautiful. That's really fine, isn't it? Not having to attach yourself to the extreme discomfort or comfort of situations, only to feel something

The same goes with people. As said above I am far from being enlightened and I can vehemently defend my (often faulty) opinion... but for me there are no completely bad or good people (which does not mean I like everyone... noooo). It is hard for me to have an idol, also it is hard for me to hate someone. There are people who show traits I think are helpful in specific circumstances (but not in all circumstances)

That sounds very sensible to me. It's really good to be there and not think that there are psychopaths all over the place. Or heroins and super-brains on the other side. Life without superlatives.

As to defining "good" and "bad":

Why not naming the highest? Take Buddha or Jesus as a role model. Or take Mother Theresa if you like her more. Or Ghandi. Or Shiva. No matter who but it should be an entity of the highest integrity you can imagine. Of course good for you ;-)

What figure is a symbol of following the universal ethical principles and as he/she became so divine it serves you well. As you don't have to think of this figure as "how often was he married? Was he true to his wife? Did he kill a cat while drinking and driving?" No, the figure has exactly for the reason to be pure to serve as the best imaginable example of the highest and purest.

Of course, the symbolism now demands the most evil as well. After all, how can you think of the highest when you have no clue about the lowest? Think of the devil, a ghastly ghoul or the crazy entities who lure you into insanity and suffering, of the heavy stones of envy and all the beasts which want to drag you down. Someone who kills, lies, betrays, steals, manipulates etc. etc.

I think we people learn through the highest and the lowest and find orientation in that. Ethical principles are the highest form of taking on integrity. But without a figure, a symbol, "ethics" would be a mere word.

... Through philosophical narratives like "Siddharta Gautama" from Herman Hesse I learn about the quality of the highest. This symbolism leads me to find refuge in times of despair or insecurity. Where would I go in those times when I cannot find sensible and empathetic advice from my ordinary fellows? ... Who lives a life without defilement and flaw? Whom do I find incorruptible?

It's likely a person I observed staying calm and all-party when a drama arises. Now, it's interesting to know from where this particular person finds orientation. I wouldn't seek a human from which I know that in times I need consolation or advice that he would be all excited or lame about what I just told him. The more I can be this human myself, the better.

What do you think?