the natured root

skeptical
critical
pessimistic
cynical

not

skeptic
critic
pessimist
cynic

that is that, what i am (my “dynamic” that i continually, recently refer to) is not any one thing. i am a combination of things, as i believe all humans and all things in existence are. i cannot vouch for nonexistence or quasistence or even the many things that i have projected conclusions through observations. obviously the further from my own witness or direct experience an event or idea is (or is derived from) the less detail or intuition i will have about the event/idea or the less relative experiences i will have to triangulate an understanding from or for.

that i say or present ideas or perform actions that are skeptical/critical/pessimistic/cynical in of themselves, i- myself am not distinctly any one of those things. i am equally optimistic, hopeful, forgiving, and understanding. humans are not any one thing. we use categories and ideas or labels to identify reference points between our own “universes,” realities, perspectives, perceptions, point of views (the way we each see life and reality). altruism and selfishness can exist in the same person. “can” is a key word. so are words like “perhaps” or relative, possible, dependent (on), may (be), necessarily, etc. that is to say that these words represent the idea of a changing dynamic. they do not represent or imply static absolutes. “static cling” and “static electricity” are popular phrases that i repurpose as metaphors representing the need for the majority of human-kind to “cling” to unchanging(static) ideas or processes. some people, i should say many, will kill for this cling or comfort. that is the extreme and realized potential of human-kind. it hasn’t changed in recorded history and it is probable that it will not change immediately. it will most likely follow evolutions process, and likewise, the “time-based progress” we utilize as our rule within the existence continuum.

what do we do with knowledge, awareness, information, and similar sorts? do we ignore and suppress what we witness or know? or do we accept, embrace, or acknowledge? we can be purposefully naïve or blatantly-loudly aware, but categories or ideas that represent static or absolutes do not seem to do well for the inherent balance of our nature, or of the “way” of existence-entire.

my nature seeks balance. i am not passive in mind. i am definitely not passive in body – how can i or anyone be unless there is trauma present? there is a compulsion of instinct, an exposure of the daily content and influence; environment and variable element. inbetween is the intellect. and within this dynamic of self i sense those things that feel right. as right as anything can feel to an individual. our wisdom, our intuition, our “gut” feeling is fed by the content of our experiences. experience can be seen to contain the same kind of layered model as does food. fat, protein, nutrients, calories, etc. and what do we feed our intellectual dynamic? is it fatty experience? is it overly lean? is it mainly centered on desserts or our favourites?
the balance my dynamic seeks includes the “diet of my experience.” my mind is receptive to as many points of view as can be had. i am open to perspectives because it is in these various sights that give enhanced potential for understanding. i like to call this “triangulation.”
the continuum of my personal dynamic is made of this stuff.