[MD] Virulent reality.

[MarshaV]

At 12:42 PM 9/12/2008, you wrote:
>[Marsha]
>To me a self is not one and not many.
>
>[Arlo]
>If there is only "one" at the expense of others being "unreal", then 
>it is hardly a fiction. You can't have it both ways. You are clearly 
>advocating a "real self" one should "be honest" about. And you 
>clearly tie this "real self" to the physiological body it inhabits. 
>All well and good, but this way the self ceases to a fiction.

The self is an ever-changing, collection of overlapping, 
interrelated, inorganic, biological, social and intellectual, static 
patterns of value.  It is not a thing.  It is a process.



>[Marsha]
>Self is a process.  Being honest is also a process.
>
>[Arlo]
>Honesty about what? You keep pointing to irrelevencies. I keep 
>saying that the only "honesty" is what we both agree to be true. I 
>present who I am, you either accept that or reject it. If you try to 
>find "dishonesty" in this process by referring out to a 
>physiological form, or referring out to "other selves" that share my 
>gray matter, then you are mistaking illusion for reality.

Who is to say what is irrelevant?



>[Marsha]
>I don't think I need to point it out.  At the moment I'm in the 
>process of being suspicious.  And I have explained to you why.  What 
>would be the odds of such a coincidence?
>
>[Arlo]
>At any given moment, we always make the best possible choice from 
>among the information we find valuable. I don't right care that you 
>think "SA", "Krimel" and "Arlo" share the same biological form. I 
>expect when Horse tells you otherwise you'll rescind, unless of 
>course "Horse" is another variation of "Arlo". How could you trust 
>that he is not? Maybe he is. Maybe everyone here is all "variations 
>of Arlo" and you are interacting with one person "pretending" to be 
>everyone else. You can walk around in a paranoid state about all 
>kinds of things all your life, if you so choose. I mean, what 
>"evidence" do I have that "Marsha", "Platt" and "Joe" are not 
>"variations of a theme"? What "evidence" do I have that your gender 
>matches your physiological body, and let me ask what evidence could 
>I have that you could not fake? Indeed, what evidence does anyone 
>else here have that "Arlo" and "Marsha" are also not variations. A 
>phone number? They can be rerouted very easily. A voice? I can find 
>a woman easily to "be" Marsha on the phone. A photo on a website? 
>C'mon, that's about as fake-able as pie. A meeting in person? If I 
>can find a female voice, I can easily hire a female actress to "be 
>you". If people believe "Marsha" and "Arlo" to be physiologically 
>discrete, or not, is their own hang-ups based on how these read our 
>presentations here.

Now you're being silly.



>[Marsha]
>Orange and blue are colors dependent on eyes, seeing and a visual 
>object.  How one feels is something else.  One could easily say "I'm 
>the color blue, but feeling orange?"  That would be the process of 
>being honest.
>
>[Arlo]
>No, being honest would be saying, "I am the color orange, regardless 
>of the pigment in my physiological form". When you buy me a dress, 
>you base the color NOT on "what color Arlo is" but "what color is 
>Arlo's body". They are two different things. To conflate them is a mistake.

Right.  You and Zeus are going to tell me what is a 
mistake.   There's not a bunny's butt chance that's going to happen.



>[Marsha]
>I don't know how many average people would actually agree with what 
>you described.  I think it is far too abstract.  Either way 
>'continuity across time' and 'continuity across context' is 
>illusion.  Cultural glasses.
>
>[Arlo]
>What is an "average" person? Just curious. And if you did really 
>believe that "continuity across time" and "continuity across 
>context" is illusion, you would not have began this post saying "To 
>me a self is not one and not many", for this says that these are not 
>illusions at all, but that there is one self that transcends time and context.

An "average" person is a good-hearted, hard-working average 
citizen.  I do not recognized your interpretation of my opening comment.



>[Marsha]
>You may be at the University too long.
>
>[Arlo]
>Fair enough. Maybe I do overestimate the intelligence of people by 
>thinking they can understand and handle complex thoughts.

Or maybe you mistake quantity of words for quality of thought.



>[Marsha]
>Culture and language are structured for a self that is independent 
>with a body and mind, and a gender association.  Okay, add 
>soul.    "One body, one mind and one soul", yet thought to be one 
>independent agent.
>
>[Arlo]
>Well this is my point. These things are not "real", just social 
>conventions. There is no "self" that exists across contexts. But we 
>structure our activity that way for social reasons. Culture sees 
>"body, mind and soul" as fixed, connected and continuous over time 
>and place. Seen this way, there is one real "Arlo", who's "honest" 
>reality is bound to his physiological form, and who may "pretend" to 
>be other people but is really the same old Arlo. I deny this view, 
>and indeed I find it horribly problematic when you really examine it.

Huh!  Want to untangle this paragraph?  What exactly do you deny?




>[Marsha]
>I do not know how you got to this place, and where "realness" came 
>from.  I'm defending 'wanting honesty in communication'.
>
>[Arlo]
>Explain to me, please, how I can be "honest" about something that 
>has no reality? Your demanding "honesty" points to something "real" 
>as opposed to something "pretend". I may "pretend to be a boy" or 
>"pretend to be SA", but the realness is that I am "one girl" 
>pretending to be both. You base the honesty of SA or Arlo on 
>something you define as "real". You cling to an illusion. You say 
>words rather than believe them.

I cling to many illusions.  They keep me floating and out of a 
sanitarium.  Doesn't mean I believe them.



>[Marsha quote Meredith Brooks]
>I'm a bitch, I'm a lover...
>
>[Arlo]
>Exactly. You are a plurality. A multiplicity. Any suggestion of a 
>"singular" Marsha behind all these various faces is an illusion. Any 
>suggestion that there is a "reality" behind "what you want to be" is 
>an illusion.

Dah...

But I still, in conventional conversation, expect honesty.  And if I 
don't get it, I might think you are lacking arete. :-P



>I'm an Arlo, I'm an SA
>I'm a Horse, I'm a Marsha...
>
>Whatever you want it to be, for you that's what it will be. (Arlo 
>quotes Johnny Lydon)


And remember, no matter where you go, there you are.  ~Confucius




.
.

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.