Rhetorical Questions
Jul. 20th, 2004 09:15 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
greenstormSo, here we go.
How do you explain intimacy?
How do you explain involvement, or closeness?
Are these things a choice, where they happen because you decide them to, or are they something that comes from work, from interaction and contact and are dependent on that contact?
Love seems to me to be independent of closeness or intimacy, where it is just there and you can do what you want with that. It survives anything. Is this a common experience?
How much intimacy do people need? How much do we need to trust other people?
Is it okay to never be deeply intimate with anyone? Is it possible, sane or insane?
Is intimacy a function of time spent together? Of honesty between people? Of both, or of something more than either?
If so, does this mean a person can only be intimate to a certain extent at any one time? That is, if they are very deeply intimate with one person, will they then have to be less intimate with others?
Is intimacy a two way thing? If you read my livejournal, which is a very intimate inner part of me, are you intimate with me without me knowing you?
If I don't meet you, but I think about you, and so I make up things which are not true about you but I feel I am intimate with you, then who am I intimate with?
Is it best to be intimate with few people, or many? Is it better to be intimate with people similar to you, or very different? A range?
Is it easier for me to initiate intimacy, or to sustain it? It feels the latter is harder. Can one only be intimate with certain people that 'fit' both circumstantially and personality-wise?
Why do the people whom I offer intimacy tend to accept it initially, and then become frightened long-term? Why do I follow this pattern with other people? Why do people tend to fear the person who offers intimacy the fastest?
Does intimacy require commitment? Trust? What is commitment? Is it meaningless, when made, and only given form by action day after day? Or is a commitment itself meaningful even if circumstances prevent it coming to fruition? What if those circumstances involve, in whole or in part, a decision to not act upon the commitment? Is a commitment broken by death less betrayed than one broken by weakness or inability? Than by fear? What of a commitment broken by best judgement? One that both parties agree to break?
How much is it anyone's obligation to make other people happy? How much is it anyone's obligation to do *anything* that gains no return? If someone else asks you to do something harmful to them, and you do it, does that take the blame off you? Does it make you 'only' complicit? Do you retain the full blame?
Are pain and suffering, when they lead to a good end, worthwhile? What if they only might? If suffering could lead to a certain mediocre end, or a very good end that is only somewhat likely, which should you try for?
Do people have an obligation to be kind to other people? Gentle? To take them into consideration? All the time, or only in certain situations? When those people are not doing the same to them? When it could harm them greatly? Where does my nose end and your first begin, and vice versa?
Should you believe something if no one has told it to you, because you want to? Should you believe something that someone has told to you, regardless of their past history? Should you always give someone another chance? I have not always done this. Should it be reciprocal?
Are short-term benefits desireable, moreso than medium or long-term? If not, which is?
How much of another person's burden should you assume? If you love them? If you don't love them? Does it make a difference? Does taking something from someone's back remove from them the ability to carry it later?
I am very confused. If anyone has read all the way to the bottom, and I think only Kynnin may have with his philosophy courses, you may comment if you will be gentle. Please don't otherwise.
How do you explain intimacy?
How do you explain involvement, or closeness?
Are these things a choice, where they happen because you decide them to, or are they something that comes from work, from interaction and contact and are dependent on that contact?
Love seems to me to be independent of closeness or intimacy, where it is just there and you can do what you want with that. It survives anything. Is this a common experience?
How much intimacy do people need? How much do we need to trust other people?
Is it okay to never be deeply intimate with anyone? Is it possible, sane or insane?
Is intimacy a function of time spent together? Of honesty between people? Of both, or of something more than either?
If so, does this mean a person can only be intimate to a certain extent at any one time? That is, if they are very deeply intimate with one person, will they then have to be less intimate with others?
Is intimacy a two way thing? If you read my livejournal, which is a very intimate inner part of me, are you intimate with me without me knowing you?
If I don't meet you, but I think about you, and so I make up things which are not true about you but I feel I am intimate with you, then who am I intimate with?
Is it best to be intimate with few people, or many? Is it better to be intimate with people similar to you, or very different? A range?
Is it easier for me to initiate intimacy, or to sustain it? It feels the latter is harder. Can one only be intimate with certain people that 'fit' both circumstantially and personality-wise?
Why do the people whom I offer intimacy tend to accept it initially, and then become frightened long-term? Why do I follow this pattern with other people? Why do people tend to fear the person who offers intimacy the fastest?
Does intimacy require commitment? Trust? What is commitment? Is it meaningless, when made, and only given form by action day after day? Or is a commitment itself meaningful even if circumstances prevent it coming to fruition? What if those circumstances involve, in whole or in part, a decision to not act upon the commitment? Is a commitment broken by death less betrayed than one broken by weakness or inability? Than by fear? What of a commitment broken by best judgement? One that both parties agree to break?
How much is it anyone's obligation to make other people happy? How much is it anyone's obligation to do *anything* that gains no return? If someone else asks you to do something harmful to them, and you do it, does that take the blame off you? Does it make you 'only' complicit? Do you retain the full blame?
Are pain and suffering, when they lead to a good end, worthwhile? What if they only might? If suffering could lead to a certain mediocre end, or a very good end that is only somewhat likely, which should you try for?
Do people have an obligation to be kind to other people? Gentle? To take them into consideration? All the time, or only in certain situations? When those people are not doing the same to them? When it could harm them greatly? Where does my nose end and your first begin, and vice versa?
Should you believe something if no one has told it to you, because you want to? Should you believe something that someone has told to you, regardless of their past history? Should you always give someone another chance? I have not always done this. Should it be reciprocal?
Are short-term benefits desireable, moreso than medium or long-term? If not, which is?
How much of another person's burden should you assume? If you love them? If you don't love them? Does it make a difference? Does taking something from someone's back remove from them the ability to carry it later?
I am very confused. If anyone has read all the way to the bottom, and I think only Kynnin may have with his philosophy courses, you may comment if you will be gentle. Please don't otherwise.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Thoughts
Date: 2004-07-21 01:03 am (UTC)"The simplest questions are the most profound. Where were you born? Where is your home? Where are you going? What are you doing? Think about these, and watch your answers change."
Because I've asked myself similar questions, before, during, after relationships, and the answers for me change depending on my level of optimism, anger, despair, etc. And that's a good thing, I think, because asking these questions I think is just as important as answering them.
Of all the questions you asked resonated...
"Is intimacy a two way thing? If you read my livejournal, which is a very intimate inner part of me, are you intimate with me without me knowing you?"
I would like to think I am experiencing a part of you I haven't met yet, but at the same time, I also hope you'd be inspired to read my LJ, because writing /is/ such an intimate part of me too. For me, then, intimacy /is/ about connection, deep connection, that is beyond and passed through all the insecurities into a place of mutual wonderment.
"The world is your excercise book, the pages with which you do your sums. It is not reality, although you can express reality there if you wish. You are also free to write nonesense, or lies, or to tear the pages." RB-Illusions.
Bach expresses a freedom he envisions for our lives, to be profound and to also be base/animalistic - for me it's about not self censoring. You chose to bring these questions into the light and thereby give us a mirror into our own souls, and that's a great gift, especially since it is borne of pain and sorrow. It takes great courage to ask these questions and to hope for answers, even temporary ones.
"Your conscience is the measure of your honesty of your selfishness. Listen to it carefully." RB-Illusions
I have struggled with a great many of the issues you've shared on your LJ and I have felt petty, selfish and demanding when 'analyzing' my motivations, but I'm begining to understand that my own need for a particular kind of intimacy isn't selfish, but rather my being crying out for the fulfillment of an unmet need. How I understand that need is dependent on my ability to be gentle with myself, to acknowledge that the need doesn't have to be 'justified' to be 'right.' It just 'is' and that's all it needs to be. How I bring the fulfillment of that need into the world is where it can get sticky, because it can often clash with other's expectations. That's what I'm working on now, how to communicate a need without 'needing' someone else to fulfill it immediately.
"The truth you speak has no past and no future. It is, and that's all it needs to be." RB -Illusions
I worry that this hasn't been a gentle post for you, that it sounds to preachy with all the Bach quotes, but I think intimacy is built on a common language, a language that develops over time, where the signs and symbols that are shared between people have similar definitions. This is my language, my way of expressing my support and care for what you're struggling with, to say, "Yes! I see! I have felt similar!" and to share what has brought me comfort during my struggles.
Thank you for your gift of honesty.