"A relativist cannot say that all human beliefs are subjective - except the belief that all human beliefs are subjective".

-

A quote from a book I bought recently, the only copy they shipped in. Couldn't resist buying it and now I have to resist reading it. It is, fortunately, tucked away safely on the shelf. Maybe I should lend it to a friend or something.

A chapter reads, "Ishmael's problem & delights of keeping quiet".

-

Recently, all I've been wondering about is the point of speaking. What is the point of speaking, why do we need to express ourselves, why the need to show others who we are -- one afternoon I tried to conclude it's only because we cannot live alone. My reason being, we speak to find people similar to us, have people agree with us, listen to others' point of view and share ours to find out if we're similar or different etc -- mostly to have people with us, accepting us, to be on our side.

(conclusions are, of course, subject to change.)

And then I realised my questioning was all based on my rejection of things, this previous thought based on my (subconscious) rejection of dependency. The inability to live alone is pathetic, which is shaped by a thought based on experience: being dependent equates to getting into a wreck eventually, so one should never be dependent.

And so I asked myself, if we speak only because we don't like to be alone, and the inability to be alone is unacceptable, why speak?

-

If so, each question might be born out of a personal need to resolve a personal conflict, in the disguise of a universal statement: if my questioning was driven by a subconscious thought, and the 'conclusion' I came up with at that time was simply an answer to make myself feel better...

what are 'answers' other people tell us? Is it not simply their answer to their own questions, based on their experiences? Are the only words we can trust words said by people who understand themselves (and their subconscious) fully? We might never know if anybody has fully achieved that, and in that case,
the truth -- is almost non-existent. Almost.

-

That conclusion is only my conclusion. And it is flawed. Flawed only when I try to think: is this the truth, do people agree?

Which conclusion is not flawed? Create something at any point;

1) Even in my perspective, it will change with time;
2) from the perspectives of 10 other people, that creation looks different in 10 different ways, right from the very start.

-


Isn't whatever I said true? Of course it might not be true.

And so the learning point of today: put might behind everything.