Relatable fictional characters

fiveintime wrote:When it comes to complicated ideas, though, I appreciate simplicity. The more complicated the idea, the more skill it takes to make something simple, and the better it is to read.

You might remember this (spec. the philosophy thesis excerpt): antisocial-personality/topic96095-270.html#p1937617

Which is a good example of what I mean. Even the simplification I gave could be considered complex, but it was at a degree of complexity tailored to a conversation with Courtier, crystal, and yourself. Simplifying the idea any further would shortchange the concepts being discussed; not all ideas are reducible to a level suitable to everyone without significant sacrifices being made. If an idea is complicated, it's complicated at the most basic form that it remains complete.


Example:

"Temporal bandwidth, is the width of your present, your now. It is the familiar “∆ t” considered as a dependent variable. The more you dwell in the past and in the future, the thicker your bandwidth, the more solid your persona. But the narrower your sense of Now, the more tenuous you are."


Pynchon is an extreme intellect known for his reading-difficulty and erudition, but that particular idea has become famous thanks to being existentially relevant while being descriptively irreducible: he's made it as simple as possible. The onus then falls on us to learn how to understand it. When properly grasped, it becomes beautifully simplistic.

When a concept is ultra-complicated, like the Navier-Stokes problem, even the heavily sacrificed laymen version becomes difficult: https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-Navier ... t-to-solve

I think so long as we communicate ideas in their most basic form, it works. Which will sometimes include words less commonly used, and in those cases it's pretty easy to right-click and google.

Eight wrote:I read somewhere recently that Courtier said he was really into Jason Bourne for awhile and imagined himself as him. I know you've done the same in past years.

Somehow, the two of you, both using Bourne as a fantastical device, just amuses me.

At least for me, it's not like I'm imagining myself as some kind of elite spy; it's more of an overall feeling. When I'm under pressure, I become calmer, rational, and more decisive. The more pressure I'm under, the more I feel this way, until, at some point, it almost feels like the world slows around me and I gain some kind of mastery of my surroundings.

It's not that I'm trying to be like Bourne, but that in being myself under the right circumstances, I naturally start to perform that way. I've thought about it quite a bit, and I think it's because there were some volatile people in my childhood, and my way of handling their volatility was to counteract it with intense, almost forceful calm.

Posting in this thread again, partly because it's one of the more interesting topics to me. I often feel like I get better insight into who or how I am when I see my behavior reflected in others. It's like there's some mental block (cognitive biases) in judging myself directly, but if I see the same behavior in somebody else, I can see everything more clearly.

What I said was

Courtier wrote:I used to idolise Jason Bourne. I liked that he could survive independently without anybody else in his life. It felt ideal

But five's explanation resonates so hard. I felt it on an intuitive level in watching but had no idea what it was

isn't that how introversion develops?

you retreat into your own mind to deal with volatility around you

but how is it then later on that it is this same volatility/pressure that brings you out of your own mind and focuses you/makes you calmer, something that can even be gratifying, when previously you sought to escape from it?

I interpret this differently. Although with similar motive. I interpreted it as a divorce from emotions, or a form of dissociation to deal with the surrounding's volatility/pressure.

This divorce from emotion lending itself to an illusion of control over the individual's environment (persons turning into things) conducive of temporary relief, basis to a future addiction to control -> i.e. PD

I don't condone the idea of introversion being born against anything, erecting extroversion as a norm. I think it's a cultural notion that I am not able to justify.

Pretty much that.

Enough stress for me leads to shutting down my emotional state (don't have time for that feeling crap right now), which leads to a feeling of functional serenity. It's likely a farce, and my physiological stress indicators (cortisol, blood pressure, etc) are probably through the roof, but it feels calm.

There's another aspect of it too--mindfulness and meditation practice help us be present, here, in the now. Also an aspect of a lot of sports training--things like visualization. I liken the stress response to something along the lines of this, where you just don't have time for mentally living in the past or the future, so you place yourself fully in the now. That feeling of intense presence not only makes me feel more skillful, but it also relieves me of any extraneous thoughts that might otherwise distract me.

So, intellectual and emotional serenity. It's a bit ironic that this only comes on under extreme stress, but it does make sense.

I am an introvert, but only moderately. Also, very autonomous and emotionally reserved. Not sure how much that relates.

it's like a psychological sort of calm stemming from intense focus due to heightened physiological arousal.

when you are stressed or threatened with something, you focus intensely to deal with the threat, and insodoing you push everything else out of your mind, all the clutter that may agitate you normally, thus leaving you with a clear single object focus mental state.

i think that's how it may lead to a paradoxical calm.

SweetSlumber wrote:Are there any fictional characters you can relate to/find similar to you?

Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver and Stanley from the game The Stanley Parable.

Eight wrote:As I said, gately returned me to David Foster Wallace. I am reading him now. And delving into this life. Such a mind. Such a heart. Such an exquisite and fragile and sturdy and uncompromising stance he took to life and his writing and his being. Such a struggle to deal with his emotional and psychological issues and put himself forth in his writing. A humbleness that wasn't weak at all and yet it was. I found that I have some connections in real life with his widow which was a huge surprise; I've thought of contacting her some time if that seems good and right. His life, because it's real, and his death, because that is also real, are draws to me. To me, Jason Bourne has nothing on DFW.

Reality is more enticing to me than is illusion, and I'm intrigued by the crossover of the two.

There's always that one newfound, female Wallace cultist. Give it 2-3 years and you'll flip.

?+?=?: The suicide really punctuated his failure to answer any of them. But I guess some guys enjoy the eternal blueballing. Knock yourself out. I'm too dumb or smart.

i saw alien covenant and i thought wasn't the robot a psychopath.he could be aspd