|
Post by Oliveman on Nov 5, 2007 18:28:31 GMT -5
Disclaimer: an individual, here, is not one with no connections - we'll call that an "absolute individual"
That said, here's my question-
What does it mean to be an individual?
Personal Opinion (to start things off)
An individual has these characteristics, in my opinion: Being able to think outside of the "box" of conventional thought, and recognizing on their own what's possible. A certain lack of fear with regards to interacting with others. They know themselves (goes with the above). They are able to adapt to changing situations. They question what's around them frequently. They can recognize the mistakes in their past without being weighed down by them, or without the temptation to decieve themselves. Most of all, though, true individuals aren't weighed down by others. The only reason to care about image would be personal ones- their own goals that they set for themselves. They can decern rightness and wrongness in the world around them, and act either in accordance or in opposition to those forces, purely by their choosing.
And Personally, I believe this topic is pertinent to us, because we really need to be individualistic in this sense here, mostly because we need to be able to think in new ways, and not let our perceptions about others blind us.
|
|
|
Post by dangerjane on Nov 5, 2007 21:40:20 GMT -5
Well...lemme think.
Yeah, we're all individual for sure. But there are definitely people who...push the boundaries. Maybe it depends only on their circumstances--after all, we change dramatically depending on our company.
But the ones we'd call individuals are the ones who have fewer inhibitions. Or rather, they can turn their inhibitions off when they need to. They aren't afraid to make people uncomfortable, whether it's to make a point or simply to see the reactions.
I guess I'm kind of that. I mean you wouldn't look at me and say THAT girl is an INDIVIDUAL but that's only part of it. Really it's a state of mind. Like floating around everything.
Yea the individuals are the curious ones.
|
|
|
Post by misslissy on Nov 7, 2007 21:58:01 GMT -5
I'd agree with most of it, all except for one thing. They question what's around them frequently. I think that a true individual is the one who holds within themselves the power to know the difference between what should be questioned and what should be believed. For anyone who questions all the time, existence would be miserable? Indeed, would they truly exist, if they questioned their existence? I think that's another interesting question. Probably only tangentially related, but I think that better fits my definition of an individual.
|
|
Kyle
Full Member
~~~~~ Trust Beyond See ~~~~~ "One light will tear apart the night"
Posts: 204
|
Post by Kyle on Nov 7, 2007 22:02:55 GMT -5
And may I add, knows when the question doesn't matter ^_-
|
|
|
Post by Oliveman on Nov 7, 2007 22:34:54 GMT -5
Well, it's dependent on the "how" of the belief. What are they willing to set up for themselves?
I think individuals need to be able to know the possibility of self-deception within themselves without being needlessly suspicious of it. In this way they're both independent from others, and from their own past, which would dictate how they might be enticed to continue self-deception.
|
|
|
Post by vonshneer on Nov 9, 2007 20:01:20 GMT -5
i disagree that to be individual you would have less inhibitions because say the whole world had no inhibitions then wouldnt the one with inhibitions be individual? individualism is a term that is used to identify the status of someone (or possibly some thing) when they are not being categorized in a group. for example "when jim is not part of his bowling team -the cobras- he can be quite an individual." or "when jim is with his bowling team - the cobras- he sticks out among them as an individual"
|
|
Kyle
Full Member
~~~~~ Trust Beyond See ~~~~~ "One light will tear apart the night"
Posts: 204
|
Post by Kyle on Nov 10, 2007 3:42:31 GMT -5
Well said, Von. I concur.
Those definitions all reflect something about their respective poster. Parts of the reflections trouble me. Rather than call anyone out and deviate from the topic, though, y'all can ask me what I think about your definitions via PM or IM, if you're interested.
|
|
|
Post by Oliveman on Nov 10, 2007 18:06:55 GMT -5
My point is that you can have a society of individuals. I'm looking at individualism from the perspective of relationships, not distinction.
I guess these two can be combined, in the sense that people who end up distinguished from others, standing out in some way, essentially know the same things as in my model - that they don't need to look to anyone else for a model of how to behave. They find their own path.
Edit: And of course, you are right in the sense that they can't find their own path if it is just outlined somewhere ("The Path of the Individual"). That's why I think we need some ambiguity in the model.
|
|
Kyle
Full Member
~~~~~ Trust Beyond See ~~~~~ "One light will tear apart the night"
Posts: 204
|
Post by Kyle on Nov 10, 2007 18:46:18 GMT -5
To be blunt, that kind of thinking is immature.
Looking to others is a good way to learn how to behave. For example, I recognize people who have traits that I value, so I want to be more like them.
It's still their path, a path of their choosing. Be careful--you sound like being different is ideal. That's insulting to all of the ways that are good and have worked.
|
|
|
Post by Oliveman on Nov 10, 2007 23:35:16 GMT -5
As a note, I think what I'm really talking about is the indepenant individual. Till now I've been rolling both words into one. To be blunt, that kind of thinking is immature. Looking to others is a good way to learn how to behave. For example, I recognize people who have traits that I value, so I want to be more like them. I agree. That is immature and the individual should be able to recognize that kind of notion in himself as harmful. What I'm talking about is an unexamined model. I should've been more clear. It's still their path, a path of their choosing. Be careful--you sound like being different is ideal. That's insulting to all of the ways that are good and have worked. I'm not saying that at all. I was refering to the path of being an individual. Besides, individualism is more of an attitude towards paths than a path itself. Being "different" is just as much of a path, one many choose in terrible mistake. What I am saying is that the individual knows how to construct their own path, which may or may not lie along conventional roads, or be constructed from examining conventional thought. Also, I'm not saying being an individual is "ideal". There are pros and cons to everything, and I think we should look at them here.
|
|
Kyle
Full Member
~~~~~ Trust Beyond See ~~~~~ "One light will tear apart the night"
Posts: 204
|
Post by Kyle on Nov 11, 2007 20:58:21 GMT -5
Then, it would be better to separately address the two concepts, independence and individuality.
I need you to more clearly identify when you're talking about the topic--what it means to be an individual--and when you want to change the topic to a different concept--individualism. The former is a condition and the latter is an attitude. I value clear transitions ^_-
Individualism: 1. a social theory advocating the liberty, rights, or independent action of the individual. 2. the principle or habit of or belief in independent thought or action. 3. the pursuit of individual rather than common or collective interests; egoism.
Looking at those definitions, especially the second, I think "individualism" is about avoiding blind faith and blind followership, as I believe Oliver is trying to say.
Perhaps we would be better to start conversations like this with a dictionary definition, something less subjective that can guide us more in our discussions as a reference point.
|
|
|
Post by Oliveman on Nov 12, 2007 0:10:42 GMT -5
Ok, point taken. Now that being said, how do we attain it? (clear transition? ;P)
|
|
Kyle
Full Member
~~~~~ Trust Beyond See ~~~~~ "One light will tear apart the night"
Posts: 204
|
Post by Kyle on Nov 12, 2007 1:28:07 GMT -5
I'm repeating myself because you haven't acknowledged the above as already being a response to your question =)
|
|
|
Post by Oliveman on Nov 12, 2007 3:18:49 GMT -5
I don't think the thread should get mired in this kind of back and forth And, addressing what you said and quoted- yes, that is what I'm saying, and when I'm talking about an individual, I'm talking about an individualistic individual. What I'm interested in now is how one gets there. Answers? : ) please?
|
|
Kyle
Full Member
~~~~~ Trust Beyond See ~~~~~ "One light will tear apart the night"
Posts: 204
|
Post by Kyle on Nov 12, 2007 18:34:25 GMT -5
To Oliver Then what do you want me to do? You've given me no guidelines for how to act, instead.
For clarity, it would be better to keep the two separate--an individual (someone distinct from a group, per Vonshneer) and individualism (the pursuit of independent thought or action, though you may be acting the same as everyone else in your group). I won't follow you as well if you keep mixing the two =)
Thus, a better question is, "How can we pursue individualism?"
Response to the Topic I think we can approach individualism in two ways:
1) By living consciously. Put thought behind everything we do so we can learn from every action.
This doesn't contradict Lissy, though--we shouldn't question everything all the time. For example, once I've challenged my existence, there's no need to repeat the challenge until I have something new to add to the debate.
2) By being open to all possibilities--recognizing that we may be wrong and willing to sacrifice our sense of security and comfort for something greater.
It's easy to keep my faith when I don't look at the whole picture, just as it would be easy to be racist or sexist if I only chose to recognize the stereotypes or one way of thinking.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Edit Warning: I'm starting to think that the term "individualism" is erroneous and that "independence" is better. The idea is not to be different from everyone else, it's to be independent...
*also thinking about a whole religious discussion on how God wants us to be independent, but that's a different topic* ((let me know via PM if you want me to start that topic... though I may do it anyway at some point))
|
|