Intellect of anything. Do butterflies have intellect or is it intellect of nature which they follow?

Intellect is connected with self-consciousness, ability to develop oneself disregarding the natural state one could be in thinking what one could, should be and would be, how else to do, how many options there are for that person to take advantage and see solutions. It is awareness and learning of one’s abilities, possibilities and what is around, learning by looking, imitating, inventing, trying out, failing, seeing ways to evolve with what one has and putting things together. It is not enough to have information you have to know what to do with it. It is to see oneself as one self with something special to contribute. It is to be able to manipulate, calculate, think for oneself, see consequences of actions, be able to realize oneself as individually capable being and solve the complexity rather than escape it. Intellect is itself complex to the point we are not clear yet what it is. We still dwell in the old concept of intellect and are very quick to think of knowing what intellect is. The concept of intelligent things and beings and intelligence in people we many times like to keep alive as one-sided, thin and inaccurate. It could be mixed with a loud bully who is rich. To be able to make a fortune equals intellect in this world. It means one is able to play the game of the market, ready to take risks knowing circumstances, map of the market and ready to put oneself there in the game.

The idea of what intellect is, is more an illusion, what gets our attention and gets noticed most and as such keeps the old structures of society as they have been. Where intellect is found can surprise as deeds talk mightier than words. Who has intellect, how it actualizes itself in our every day when it seems to have vanished but still we think we are very clever. Doing what? It is stitched into and stamped on, held on though it is gone, sown and hammered in a way that it stays on the surface rather than would be thoroughly understood, weight, respected, found and known, if you know what I mean. Simple solutions can be brilliant but be simple and oversimplify complexity is stupid. It is a possession and quality hastily judged which deed itself shows lack and disrespect towards intellect as it is something that measures carefully looking into details and nuances rather than glancing fast without second thought. Intellect has been a possession of the upper classes and has been seen as result more than something that all could have and cultivate. High-born more than peasants, men more than women, adults more than children, money men more than poor men.

It is the most talked about characteristic and trait of anything. We may say that something is frivolous, meaningless, something is difficult and something stupid is easy, light-headed. Intellect is high and stupidity is low. It is to pay attention, ask, learn, but it is not to underestimate because nothing is meaningless. The mere label can do a great deal of damage especially when those labels given get stuck and are taken as such without questioning why it is so, who says, who decided this and why it could not be looked further, why it could not be something else. True stupidity is to believe without second thought, not to see underneath, not to do research and learn from that and believe old truths are true always. Something said becomes a label and fable when said repeatedly like a fate made by people. There is more than meets the eye is true wisdom. To play a broken record on and on, as does mankind in repeat doing the same mistakes over and over again. Things and beings represent something that have intellectual capital of certain amount. Intellectual capital gives value in cases where there is vast public awareness by this capital, what this intellectual capital is and value of what? It has contributed to make general innovations, understanding of facts and truths, made our comprehension wider about the world and ourselves. How we find intellect is to find meaning and more importantly how do we find intellect of our own and evolve and how we see evolving.

To learn value of things and beings, what truly is precious goes beyond intellect. We make a mistake when we stop there and start admiring intellect. Intellect is a tool. We are taught who is who, whom we should be afraid of and why, where value and strength come from, what is valuable, what it is to be strong. We learn to unappreciated ourselves as intelligent learners and makers when atmosphere is set in a way who can be intelligent and what it is to be intelligent. It is to put something and someone on to their place which place is dictated not necessarily actively chosen. To call someone or something stupid is to take no interest further. It is to verbally say out loud where you stand compared to what you deem stupid and beneath you because you are more clever. To judge is to deny development. To say she is an idiot means there is not anything other than irritating non-intellectual nonsense she drivels, does and represents. She is useless. She or he is worthless because of this judgement. There is not anything in her or him that is interesting to you, is valuable in what she does and says. She or he is seen through in that moment like a nonperson whose value is taken.

What does it mean to have an ego?

Does it mean one can speak of oneself all the time, bring oneself forward because one understands one’s importance as a human being in a competitive world, to value and marvel all the wonderful things one has had the pleasure to do and become? All the wonderful things that can be labelled on that person things that make him or her. What are those things and who get impressed? What happens when those things are taken away, what happens to ego? To be self-centered can be about hiding one’s insecurity, that one is not able to compete in the competitive world where we are something only when we have excellence to present as visible proof. There is weakness in a hugely ballooned ego and it is fragile in unstable world filled with similar egos, similar ideas of what it means to be impressive, sizable and important. Big egos are fragile for criticism, afraid of losing and not winning, they attack and blacklist, stump on mud trying to defeat. Big ego is fragile for negative emotions to arise and take the better of the egoist which very often happen and so easily. There is hurt and offense.

The most egotist thing to do is to do all for the benefit of oneself only, to pursue and stand for things that bring good and profit for one and few only. This is a caricature which is very real. It is a very immature type of person for whom excellence is something one is born with, god given. How many of us are egotists, narcissists, disregarding interests of other people and any other being around? By the look of it, by experience, such outlook on life is fairly common, incapability and unwillingness to take others into consideration. What does it take to grow to be considering instead of a bully? Is it the bad thing that decent people deny from themselves ever having, consideration and compassion because it is costly, time-consuming, humbling and anti-hierarchical? Is ego something the bold people possess, ruthless and greedy ones, isn’t that ego as a hollow construction, a show off and scare? We talk as we know ego. We talk it is the positive empowering pedestal, a sign of self-respect maybe, a sign of disrespect if one is a woman, arrogant and cocky. Someone who knows what one wants and is must have a strong ego among all those egos. Ego has a dark shadow, it is gendered already for children. It is the negative which is not encouraged for girls to have and a girl who shows bossy is punished for doing the same what boys ‘naturally’ express. The word ego clings to something grand, becoming and making oneself and has the clang of the worst of mankind: self-absorbed, self-centered, endless self-love, violent battle that has no end other than dead-end. When we are selfless are we without ego, without dignity and awareness and acknowledging self-worth? To be able to fight for dignity and self-worth to know what one can do is essential.

How much is it good to have an ego? Is that the right question at all, the amount of ego in us and what we do when we have self-confidence and belief in one’s capabilities. As an artist it is essential the belief in oneself. Nobody else does that for you. How essential it is to have a strong ego, not be blinded by it but have it as a force. Is it the same as large ego to have strong ego? There is no one telling me what to do, how to do what I do. I either manage it or I do not. I work as long as it takes to make the idea come true. How much does my ego effect on why I do, what I do, how I do and what kind of place I occupy for myself to be able to do the things I value? One must value oneself to find one’s passion, follow one’s interests regardless of what people around think of them and of me.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434827/individual-cowardice-killing-american-culture?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=5728623d04d3012df78b5195&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter “I’ve often found myself thinking of William Butler Yeats’s classic poem, “The Second Coming.” In it, Yeats ponders societal collapse, writing: “Things fall apart; the center cannot hold.” In our nation, the center didn’t even try to hold. The “reasonable” people made the easy choice to go with the flow of cultural upheaval.”

 

Ego. Hajoita ja hallitse: turpa mutterilla turpaan.

Ylivertainen oma itse, syntynyt, synnytetty, luova ja ajatteleva olento, jonka on annettu ymmärtää olevan virheetön ja vapaa tavoittelemaan ja tallomaan. Napa, josta maailmaa tarkastellaan ylhäältä käsin kyselemättä tai kyseenalaistamatta on kovin yleinen. Ylivertainen itse, jota on tarpeetonta muuttaa, joten on muutettava maailma omaksi kuvaksi. Maailma ihmisen kuvana on yhtä lailla tuhoutuva kuin ihminen itse. Itsekeskeinen ihmiskuva on se ideologia jonka kautta luomme omaamme. Palvottu ihminen, kehon ja tekemisen kautta, kuva, jossa maailma palvelee tuota ihmistä, seuraa häntä ja on ihmisen kyltymättömälle halulle alisteinen on sadistinen. Se on kaksiulotteinen ja lihaksikas imago, jossa kuvitteellisesti asiat ovat hallinnassa kuin kuvasta voimme nähdä ja on yhtä lailla hukkuva kapeuteensa.

Ihmisen hallinnan, hyväksikäytön ja kontrolloinnin tarve on tiettyyn pisteeseen asti tarpeellista. Meidän on elettävä. Kyse on tarpeesta, hyödystä, saavuttamisesta, siitä kuinka omistamme maailman, koska maailma on omistettava jotta voimme asettaa rajoja. Mitä elämästämme teemme ja mitä siitä voimme tehdä riippuu rajoistamme. Kyse on siitä, onko maailma täysin meidän omistettavissa ja millä tavoin omistamme; ainaisesti hyödynnettävissä oleva ja tuhottavissa? Entä toinen ihminen?

On ymmärrettävä, mitä ei ole tarvetta muuttaa, ottaa käyttöön ja milloin itsekeskeisyys menee liian pitkälle. Emme ole enää niin luonnon armoilla että meidän tarvitsisi suoraan ajatella luonnon tarpeita, kiertokulkua luontoa käyttäessämme. Luonto voi olla jo hyvinkin kaukainen ja tuntematon. Itsekeskeisyydessä on se ongelma, ettei ihminen näe itseään kokonaisuudessaan, ei pysty eikä halua näkemään eikä ottamaan huomioon monimutkaisia suhdekokonaisuuksia, oman itsen analysointi on puolitiessä, puuttellinen ja kuvitteellinen suhteessa muihin. Ihminen, joka ei ymmärrä eikä myönnä omaa virhettään on jo aloittaessaan väärässä. Kun lähtökohdat tehdä jotakin ovat perustaltaan egoistiset, on selvä, ettei tyyppi lennä kovin korkealle hyvässä mielessä, menestyksekkäästi. Kenties on aika uudelleen arvioida mikä on menestystä, mitä on voittaa itsensä. Ihminen, joka näkee virheitä muissa, mutta ei itsessään, etsii vääränlaista täydellisyyttä, sellaista jonka pinta kimaltelee. Kun täydellisyys, jota tavoitellaan onkin täydellisyyden irvikuva on maailma ylösalaisin. Täydellisyys on määrittely ja mieltymyskysymys. Tämä on rautalangasta vääntämistä, mutta näin ‘yksinkertainen’ asia kuin oma itse on hyvin kompleksinen ja monimutkainen. Oma kuva, persoona ja itsen peilaaminen tai peilaamattomuus maailmaan, josta johtuu moni ongelma, on hyvin ongelmallinen itsessään joka helposti moninkertaistuu ongelmineen. Kuinka olla maailmassa, joka antaa itserakkaiden kusipäiden päättää millainen siitä tehdään? Sellaisessa maailmassa elämme juuri nyt. Peilistä ei näy kaikki mitä ihminen on. Näkyy iho ja piirteet. Kuva aina on vain kuva.

Itsen peilaaminen maailmaan sinällään tarkoittaa, että itseään katsoo maailman kautta, keskustelee sen kanssa. Keskustelu on kuuntelemista, kyselemistä, puhumista, vastaamista eli kommunikointia. Hämmästyttävän vähän ymmärrystä ja halua kuunnella on näinkin paljon keskustelevassa ihmispaljoudessa. Meillä on keskusteluyhteyden saamiseksi laitteita ja applikaatioita, mutta silti emme ymmärrä tai halua ymmärtää. Mikä tässä on vaikea ymmärtää? Päällimmäisenä nykyihmisen mielessä on mitä minä siitä saan, kuinka maailma voi palvella ja hyödyttää minua. Kun vastaus kysymykseen, mitä varten minä olen tässä maailmassa on toteuttaa materiaalisia haaveita, jonkun toisen himoa, kunnianhimoa, omaa himoaan, niin päädymme syömään toisiamme. Kun tarkoitus, tekeminen ja tarkoitusperät ovat lihalliset, keholliset, fyysiset tarkoittaen että voima, joka tekee vaikutuksen, luo tarkoituksen elämälle on helposti mitattavissa oleva materiaalinen hyöty. Voimme pohtia, mitä on omistaa oma itse, olla oma itse ihmisten joukossa ja miten ponnistelemme asemamme eteen ja mikä asemamme on tarkoitus olla. Kuka on tuo oma itse ilman halua miellyttää, ilman halua.