Are we well grounded

[kvnchrist]

Are we the persons we wish we could be or are we moving our lives in that direction. Do we allow our successes to devour us or condemn ourselves because of our failures?

 

I have, and always will be a person who goes out of his way to help those he is acquainted with. I have helped out those who I don't know, on a small scale, but no where near the degree that I have with those that I know. I have many times volunteered aid to those, even before I was asked, Which has lead me to very uncomfortable situations when I've spread myself out too thin and had to retract offers, when my income didn't rise to the occasion. I have had to force myself to not react to others hardships, which is incredibly hard at times. There has been times that I've ran myself into the poorhouse, when the outward cash flow didn't match or exceed the incoming one.

 

I've become aware that this has become my ID, my identity, my standard bearer, my own brand of honor. It has become so much of my personality, that I have actually contemplated Suicide, when, by my own stupidity, I have jeopardized my career as a truck driver. Yes, I have more than once felt the tightness of rope around my neck than to go home, with my hat in my hand and nothing else to show for my life but memories and dust.

 

Has anyone here ever become so much of one thing, that they would fear becoming someone of less stature, according to our standards of ourselves. Do we die inside, when we don't measure up to our own standards, or do we step back. See what works, and what doesn't and accentuate the positive things in our lives, while continuing to work on the negatives, to make them less negative.

 

In a nutshell. Are we trapped inside a inflexible vision of what we wish to be?

[grannywils]

Your OP asks if we are well grounded, but then goes on to describe more of what sounds like an identity crisis or perhaps a confused psyche. I can certainly relate to any or all of these phenomena, but do not see them as one and the same.

 

My response to the well grounded issue is this. In order for me to function I need to know who I am and to behave accordingly. For me, this demands total honestly with and about myself first. Otherwise I am of no use to anyone else. To be well grounded one does not need to concern oneself with what others think or believe one should be doing or giving or whatever. But you sure as heck need to know what you believe, and then stick to it. It is all about character. You may have heard me mention this trait before. I Have somewhere I need to be, so I will have to stop for now, but that is the gist of what I believe it takes to be well grounded.

[kvnchrist]

Your OP asks if we are well grounded, but then goes on to describe more of what sounds like an identity crisis or perhaps a confused psyche. I can certainly relate to any or all of these phenomena, but do not see them as one and the same.

 

My response to the well grounded issue is this. In order for me to function I need to know who I am and to behave accordingly. For me, this demands total honestly with and about myself first. Otherwise I am of no use to anyone else. To be well grounded one does not need to concern oneself with what others think or believe one should be doing or giving or whatever. But you sure as heck need to know what you believe, and then stick to it. It is all about character. You may have heard me mention this trait before. I Have somewhere I need to be, so I will have to stop for now, but that is the gist of what I believe it takes to be well grounded.

 

 

Don't you think if you take on a persona that doesn't work for you, that you are not grounded in the real world.

[grannywils]

The quick answer to your above question would be sometimes. However, for me this would be described more as an identity crisis. Perhaps we are arguing symantics here. But in my opinion, it is fairly important to figure out who you are prior to proceeding into the world of charity to others or "giving of yourself", etc.

 

I do understand what you are trying to say, but I guess I just come at it from a different perspective. I think that knowing oneself should be fairly simple with a certain amount of honest work. Sitting down and peeling off all your layers will help you to discover the real you, warts and all. The next step would be learning to love that person, again, warts and all. Once you have done that work then you can become the real you, if you choose. And voila you will be grounded. Unfortunately many of us prefer the facade; for a variety of reasons which may belong in another thread.

 

But to try and seriously answer your question, there are many people who may be reasonably well grounded but choose to live an artificial life in order to please others or for some other purpose. My guess is that they are not very happy people. But they may be grounded enough to know who they really are. It's hard tellin'.

[Aurielius]

"Don't you think if you take on a persona that doesn't work for you, that you are not grounded in the real world."

 

Your persona should be your actual self, it makes everything so much easier in life if the two are one and the same.

[Vagrant0]

Your persona should be your actual self, it makes everything so much easier in life if the two are one and the same.

Most people are different at work than they are at home, but how do we weigh this difference? Is the work self less genuine than the home self because the behaviors are filtered by the social demands and responsibilities of the role? Or is it that the work self is merely a reaction of the home self to those demands and responsibilities? Or is it that the home self is merely a reaction of the work self to being less hindered by those social demands and responsibilities? Where does one begin and the other end, and how do we know that both aren't actually the reaction of a third self which exists separate from work or home?

 

The problem is that we are shaped by and react to our social environments. The notion of a 'true' or 'actual' self often treats the difference in reactions as somehow being fake or deceitful rather than accepting that different situations call for different attitudes or approaches. Such notions often result in an inflexibility of self as one tries to be consistent and usually in line with their primary group so that they can believe themselves to be 'true'. The problem is that when the dynamic within the primary group changes, or they wish to be part of another group, either their behavior does not fit, or it seems forced and non-genuine. With the concept of a 'dynamic' self, there are core attributes which permeate all behaviors and opinions, but the tone and selection of behaviors and opinions differs slightly based on the environment. While a dynamic self appears less consistent, it is easier to adapt to change, and finds an easier time associating with very different groups than normal. It is not the act of creating new behaviors or opinions, but rather the filtering of those which are socially beneficial from those which are not. Those who have few social circles have an easier time with this than those who, for one reason or another, move in many differing ones. Truth in behavior comes not from consistency, but rather the intentions behind behavior being genuine. The problem however is that people like consistency and the ability to definitively label a person as being one kind or another.

 

Is someone somehow more 'real' even when they don't change their outward behavior even when their underlying motives are less genuine, compared to someone who changes their outward behavior, but retains the same motives and feelings? Isn't it possible that the reason why someone doesn't tell off their employers isn't because they want to keep a job, but rather because their core beliefs accept reality and people as imperfect, and acknowledge that any such action to try and point this out would not result in any change from this and the ability to call your boss an 'a**hole' depends less on the role, and more on the ability of said 'a**hole' to value your opinions or not react in a way which is not in your best interest. This concept of being 'real' often conflicts with the concept of having wisdom and understanding of your environment. It also hints at the belief that one should just do what they want without regard to others. If these are the values of an 'actual' self, I'll be perfectly happy being 'fake' and accepting my 'fakeness', because, well, that is just the person I am.

[Nintii]

Being successful is done on purpose, it never just falls on you ... goal orientated people always achieve more than those who aim for nothing.

But, I am not my goal, and therefore don't feel like a failure when I don't achieve what I've set out to do, I simply search for another way up the mountain.

Failures are those who quit, not those who suffer a setback but keep going.

 

Many believe that their actions define who they are, hence the tendency to always ask people when meeting them, "what do you do"?

As if their actions or career define them, no, I find that very shallow.

 

What if you are a doctor and oneday your hands start shaking and you have to leave the profession or what if you're a professional sports person

and you're involved in an accident and now your careeer is shot to hell, what now ?

Who are you now, a nobody, an EX something or the other ?

 

Rubbish, you are more than that, you as a human have such immeasurable value that you cannot tie it up in what you do, or your race, or your gender

or even your level of education.

 

Believe in yourself and don't wait for or look for approval or disapproval from others because that's a sure fire way of a crooked and stunted personality.

Unfortunately, too many people look to their partners, family or friends to prop them up and then become co-depedant and weak and of course manipulated by

the very same people.

 

My strength, foundation and anchor lies outside the box, untouchable by convention.

I am strong.

[grannywils]

In my opinion, the last three posters, Aurielius, Vagrant0, and Nintii have all, in one way or another described the behaviour of well grounded individuals. How those individuals make their way in the world is their choice, because they know who they are and can make decisions on that basis.

 

Hope that this makes some sense to you, kvnchrist.

[Flintlockecole]

I literally have to Act as in Acting like a play when I leave my house, people do not take kindly to me actually being a highly outspoken person to anything a government, society etc throws at me, I lied through my teeth to get a job, Even then I have to keep up the character I'm portraying which in turn kills the persona which is actually me. It's almost like the character Patrick Bateman from the movie American Psycho when he makes his speech at the end of the Movie when his lawyer thinks his confession about killing all those people was a joke:

 

"There are no more barriers to cross. All I have in common with the uncontrollable and the insane, the vicious and the evil, all the mayhem I have caused and my utter indifference toward it I have now surpassed. My pain is constant and sharp, and I do not hope for a better world for anyone. In fact, I want my pain to be inflicted on others. I want no one to escape. But even after admitting this, there is no catharsis; my punishment continues to elude me, and I gain no deeper knowledge of myself. No new knowledge can be extracted from my telling. This confession has meant nothing."

 

In other words people start thinking the person your portraying is the real self and the actual real self is just some kind of joke or however oneself interprets it.

[Vagrant0]

I literally have to Act as in Acting like a play when I leave my house, people do not take kindly to me actually being a highly outspoken person to anything a government, society etc throws at me, I lied through my teeth to get a job, Even then I have to keep up the character I'm portraying which in turn kills the persona which is actually me.

Which is a common practice among the young who are still trying to sort out the person they want to be from the person they have to be for the sake of their relationship with society.

 

Generally speaking;

Ages 1-6 are spent in a state of shock trying to cope with understanding some level of what makes up reality.

Ages 7-13 are spent trying to define onself socially, first among family, then among friends.

Ages 14-22 are spent in a state of psychosis, crisis, and depression as you try to bring that defined self out of conflict with the greater society.

Ages 22-35 are spent in relative comfort as you have developed both an understanding of the world and yourself.

Ages 35-45 are spent in turmoil as you realize that you really don't know what anything is any more and are feeling the effects of age so spend most of your free time digging back into things from your youth and trying to find yourself again.

 

So pretty much, your whole life is just a cycle of invention and reinvention as you try to be someone who you can both feel comfortable being while still being able to function in the world. As you get older, most realize that there is a time and place for everything, even when it comes to activism, speaking out, or trying to be buddy buddy with people you would personally love to run over in your car... repeatedly... All because you want to eat, have shelter, have nice things. Even the bums on the street have to put their own politics and ideals aside from time to time just to avoid being knifed in their sleep by someone who is sick of hearing about it and might like their box, or to spend time with another warm body. No man is an island, and part of being a part of any society means accepting some of their values.