Doors open, Doors close

When something looks possible/doable to you, that door is open.
When something looks impossible/undoable to you, that door is closed.

Every relation/person is also a door,
That is open or closed to you.
They in-turn open other doors to things,
And/or open doors to other people,
Who then act as doors to more things and people,
And so on…

Doors can open in a cascade, like dominos falling,
And open a whole new vista of experience for you,
And all of it could be from a single door (a person you suddenly made contact with).

The reverse can happen too,
That is, all of your current vast arrays of doors can also start closing up in a rapid cascade.
A bodily problem can do that, it can just shutdown your open doors rapidly in no time.
Similarly a single relation with an difficult person can bring so much destruction,
That most of your doors could close off from that.

A good time in your life is when doors were opening and opening for you,
Keeping fresh enjoyments piling over one another.
A bad time is when doors keep on closing imprisoning you further and further,
Giving you the grief of loss again and again.

The 3 variables of time, space, and people

Here are the different combinations:
# This Time, Same space, Same people
# This Time. Different space, Same people
# This Time, Same space, Different people
# This Time, Different space, Different people
# Different Time, Same space, Same people
# Different Time. Different space, Same people
# Different Time, Same space, Different people
# Different Time, Different space, Different people

Here, time, space, and people refers to what/whom you hold in your mind more than the actual physical reality differences or the actual people around you.
Since your conscious experience of reality is mostly only from what/whom you engage/invest/attend to in your mind.

A timeline for your life can be charted out with these 3 variables,
Marking out the broad episodes and flow in your lifetime till date.
A diagram might look something like this say:

The flow of time

I wonder if this time-space-people position is some sort of destiny, or prewritten to some extent.
Is it prewritten that we would be at this particular time-space-people point now?
Is the overall map of our life already charted out in a vague way?
In terms of where and whom we’d be with in our minds at a certain time?

In our lifetime we may meet around a 1000 people?
1000 in proportion to 7.5 billion is like ‘7.5 millionth’ of the world population.
That means I would have to live 7.5 million lives interacting with 1000 new people in each life to cover the whole population?
And how much do we even understand the few people around us? (let alone the 1000 people we may roughly know).
We may reach some depth only after many years with a few people, that too only if we keep up the intensity.
Imagine the varieties of experiences possible.

Postmodernist vs. Traditionalist

PricklesAndGoo

* The postmodernist is in denial of limitations…….The traditionalist is in denial of potential
* The postmodernist is in love with the idea of all is nurture…..The traditionalist is in love with the idea that all is nature
* The postmodernist sees truth as entirely subjective…..The traditionalist sees truth as entirely objective
* The postmodernist is mystical/abstract…..The traditionalist is literal/practical
* The postmodernist thinks in metaphysical terms……The traditionalist thinks in physical terms
* The postmodernist is coming from top -> bottom…….The traditionalist is coming from bottom -> top
* The postmodernist believes lower instincts come from the higher…..The traditionalist believes the higher functions are only to serve lower instincts
* The postmodernist is coming from the heaven standpoint…..The traditionalist is coming from the earth standpoint
* The postmodernist is a rebel/renegade/systems-transformer…..The traditionalist is a systems-maintainer/protector/supporter
* The postmodernist ego is tilted to superego service…..The traditionalist ego is tilted to id service
* The postmodernist is relativist…..The traditionalist is absolutist

I could also call these poles by other names such as:
Liberals vs. Conservatives
It reminds me of Alan Watts and his classification of people into 2 broad types:
Prickly(Traditionalist) and Goo(Postmodernist).
Now how do we marry these 2 poles :)?

General masses vs. sociopaths vs. contemplators

GENERAL MASSES
In my experience, for most people, their emotions like desire, anger, liking, aversion etc. is all mapped to specific outer stuff.
There is a recognizable structure in their emotional mappings to the outer world.
But when you question them, they will always only point to the literal person, object, some situation happening, and attribute causation directly to the outer.
They cannot see their own structure, because they are seeing through that.
All their emotions are outward mapped onto a specific world image, projected from their structure, which is completely invisible and thereby absolutely true for them.
When you question them, they do not introspect, rather they might try to attack you/avoid you/ignore you/deny everything you say/attack the finger that points/ manipulate the finger etc.
This is because they cannot see what you are pointing at, at all.

SOCIOPATHS:
Sociopaths are on the far end of this spectrum.
They see the world through a hard integrated simplistic structure, that is opportunistic and looks to exploit everything for itself.
Their self structure is almost totally invulnerable to influence.
Nothing can change their reality orientation from outside since their eyes are always looking outward only.
So if you point to a structure they have, its as if you are pointing to something that does not exist. They would simply view that as an attack and try to attack your view.

Broadly the spectrum is:
Total self-reflection (total self-incrimination)—————– Total self-projection (total blame)
The spectrum could also be viewed as:
Sociopath ——————— Contemplator.
I would say, sociopaths are closer to animals, in the sense, their nature is unchangeable and immutable.
They cannot reflect on themselves and see ‘self’ as object.
So their whole world is their playground and they will demand everywhere and manipulate.
What are people on the other end of the spectrum called? – I would say, contemplators.
The following introspective functions are present in contemplators:
self-contemplation, self-examination, self-observation, self-questioning, self-reflection, self-scrutiny, self-searching, soul-searching, self-analysis, self-awareness, self-consciousness, self-recognition; introversion, self-absorption, self-centeredness, self-concern, self-involvement; self-actualization, self-discovery, self-exploration, self-fulfillment, self-realization; self-knowledge, self-revelation; self-concept, self-image, self-perception; contemplation, meditation, reflection, rumination

Contemplators cannot outrospect/project easily and operate from seeing all of reality as their responsibility including serving others.
Their self is likely prone to getting into ruminative thought loops, chaos, getting caught in logical paradoxes, conflicting desires, traffic jam energies…and so on.
The mindset of total self-projection, the state of the sociopath, is the state of mind one has when in a stage performance or when facing a big threat like a wild animal. One’s attention is then totally outward focused and that gives a taste of what a sociopath mind state is like to the contemplator folk.

Generally, when does inward focus happen then? – It happens in boredom, when there is 0 outer pressure, and when there is no threat OR if the threat is inescapable, then you retreat into total inward focus.
Another way to look at it is that sociopaths are like one-time programmable only chips, after that they function without being influenced. They are like clay that has hardened into rock.
The contemplators on the other hand are permanently programmable chips. They are ever malleable and changeable.
Contemplators stay permanently as clay.

I would think, sociopaths can comfortably roam around in the social world, because they are immune to all influences, and their total outward focus is the ideal state for survival and self-protection.
A contemplator on the other hand tends to avoid the social world, because he is very impressionable and malleable, and his outward focus is only when there are threats (i.e. he freezes into a structure temporarily only when there are threats), else he stays in his total malleable state.
So freezing into various forms and staying that way in social environments is ok if it is temporary, but to do that every day is burdensome for the contemplator.
That is why taking up one profession is difficult for a deep contemplator, because that is like forcing a malleable entity take up the same configuration/structure every single day for most of the day.
It is denying him the freedom he feels inside him everyday.
Contemplators are living in the meta-programming world itself.
Surviving in a world full of solid people is annoying for the contemplator, because he is exceptionally free and flexible but can never interact with others in that freedom.
The only way to interact with most people is to create quasi structures and interact with them within the acceptability zones intuited.
The contemplator is formless i.e. he has no intrinsic form and he is continuously aware of his freedom.
Whereas the sociopath is like a rock, a solid form, and he sees the entire world through this filter.