Actually, I will admit that I go into dark dungeon states of mind at times. I try to be proactive and try and find my way out before the dungeon gets darker and darker. Music and even a glass of wine. I most probably would have been completely chained into the dungeon during the second lockdown in England if I hadn't found this site, as some of that time I was using it almost from the time I got up until I went to bed. Some people don't seem to end up in dungeons whereas some have dungeons and mazes constantly. I also get lost physically at times, since wandering off into unknown places in childhood and I still sometimes get the wrong bus and end up almost anywhere. My mum used to speak of me 'going off the planet'.

Actually, I will admit that I go into dark dungeon states of mind at times. I try to be proactive and try and find my way out before the dungeon gets darker and darker. Music and even a glass of wine. I most probably would have been completely chained into the dungeon during the second lockdown in England if I hadn't found this site, as some of that time I was using it almost from the time I got up until I went to bed. Some people don't seem to end up in dungeons whereas some have dungeons and mazes constantly. I also get lost physically at times, since wandering off into unknown places in childhood and I still sometimes get the wrong bus and end up almost anywhere. My mum used to speak of me 'going off the planet'. — Jack Cummins

Not all those who wander are lost. — J. R. R. Tolkein

I stayed out fairly late last night and wasn't lost. A friend who was trying to call me last night was extremely cross with me with me though and I hadn't taken my phone. I had not got lost like my Radcastle Station story. Meandering around has always been my tendency and getting lost at times seems symbolic in the quest for authenticity and in philosophy. I wonder if many other people get lost literally as well as in the confusion of philosophical uncertainty.

What be dasein? — Agent Smith

"Dasein" means 'being there' or 'there being'. Heidegger means that dasein's being is an issue for dasein. "To be or not to be, that is the question". To be or not to be what?

Okay, sort of like Freddy teaching "how to become who you are" ...

I believe philosophy's central project has always been to optimize agency by helping one to unlearn 'self-immiserating habits' (i.e. foolery/stupidity) through various daily reflective practices (e.g. pythagorean, epicurean, stoic, pyrrhonian, cynical, neoplatonic, peripatetic ... pragmaticist, absurdist, etc). This is how I make sense of "true self" in the (western) philosophical tradition.

One aspect of self projection which is also worth discussing with you is the professional role personas put on, especially as mental health professionals. — Jack Cummins

As you suggest, most people put on a professional face at work. That's probably going to be the case whether you are a psychiatrist or a real estate agent. Most roles requite some role paying - especially in hospitality jobs. In medical and mental health services, as you say, you are likely to project a more bounded and attentive persona than if you're working in refrigeration. The tasks are different.

I think the question of 'authenticity' is an interesting aspect of this discussion. Do we pin this preoccupation on middle class existentialism, pop-psychology and hipsters? Authenticity seems to preoccupy a certain demographic, not just psychologically but aesthetically. Good book on this by Andrew Potter.

“The object of their desire, the “essential” core of life, is something called authenticity, and finding the authentic has become the foremost spiritual quest of our time. It is a quest fraught with difficulty, as it takes place at the intersection of some of our culture’s most controversial issues, including environmentalism and the market economy, personal identity and the consumer culture, and artistic expression and the meaning of life.”
― Andrew Potter, The Authenticity Hoax: How We Get Lost Finding Ourselves

I believe philosophy's central project has always been to optimize agency by helping one to unlearn self-immiserating habits through various daily reflective practices (e.g. pythagorean, epicurean, stoic, pyrrhonian, cynical, neoplatonic, peripatetic ... pragmaticist, absurdist, etc). — 180 Proof

I think this is a very helpful way to frame the subject. Nice.

I stayed out fairly late last night and wasn't lost. A friend who was trying to call me last night was extremely cross with me with me though and I hadn't taken my phone. I had not got lost like my Radcastle Station story. Meandering around has always been my tendency and getting lost at times seems symbolic in the quest for authenticity and in philosophy. I wonder if many other people get lost literally as well as in the confusion of philosophical uncertainty. — Jack Cummins

:up:

I thought "to lose oneself in ..." was a good thing. I can't recall where exactly I heard that being praised though.

Too, the flip side of the coin is "lost in his own world" which some regard as an unhealthy state of mind as one supposedly loses touch with reality but in this case too the detachment one experiences maybe beneficial in unconventional, sublime ways.

That all said, being lost isn't a pleasant experience due to the fact that we dread it - ships & planes (voyagers) which lose their bearings meet a sticky end if you catch my drift.

That all said, being lost isn't a pleasant experience... — Agent Smith

It is a great source of anxiety. But... we can learn to embrace our anxiety, because anxiety is the source of motivation.

It is a great source of anxiety. But... we can learn to embrace our anxiety, because anxiety is the source of motivation. — Metaphysician Undercover

Up to a point! Nec quid nimis.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Most interesting. — Ms. Marple

What, if I may be so bold as to ask, have you to report since being on the path to (self) realization?

Some writers within the tradition of sociology do explore the nature of subjectivity in relation to a sense of otherness, such as GH Mead. Also, Erving Goffman's understanding of the social presentation of self in everyday life do explore the social construction of human identity. — Jack Cummins

Mead's pretty important, yes. He's conceptualising the self as a social process, the dynamic between the "me" (what you think you are in the eyes of the others) and the "I" (what reacts to the me). The self emerges from that process. Mead would have to be one of the first to import the mind of subject into sociology.

Goffman's more of an excentric in sociology. He's had pretty influential ideas, but unlike many others he doesn't present a clear theory. One of the most interesting ideas, I think, from Presentation of Self would be role distance. A social role is some set of perceived expectations based on some trait you have: your job, your gender, your relationships... anything. So, when you're playing the role of "waiter" in a restaurant, then there are things you're supposed to do, and things you're not supposed to do. You can accept or reject the role. It's possible to play the role in a way that makes it clear you'd rather do something else. Goffman calls that cynical roleplay. However, no role completely determines your behaviour, and there are many ways you can "bring yourself" into the role (my words, not Goffman's; it's been too long since I read him, and I read a German translation to boot, because that's what was available). To the extent that you bring yourself into the role, you display role distance. Displaying role distance can be a way to reject the stricures of role play, withoug rejecting the role. It's not cynical role play. Interestingly, people who exhibit no role distance, Goffman says, are often perceived as "overly correct", or "creepy" (certainly my words). So role distnace is part of the expectations that come with playing social roles, but they're not part of the expectations of any specific roles. This is what allows people to have "their favourite waiter", for example. Public roleplaying is always geared both towards your role and what you bring to it personally.

I don't really remember what Goffman said about that beyond that; but I figure, in the context of this thread, this means that it's a structural property of life that you have to invent yourself in public. How much of yourself are you supposed to give up? Too much and you're imposing; too little and you're too reticent. That puts more pressure on the being-yourself-part than it would among "friends". You're supposed to be organically or spontaneously yourself, but in public you need to claclulate yourself, too. And if you get into the habit of playing roles and see "friend" as a role, too, eventually you might end up feeling that you can only "be yourself" when you're alone, but there's little you can do alone, and you feel like there must be some sort of mythic "true self" - something you can be anywhere, anywhen - no matter what role you play - without effort. (That's me riffing off Goffman.)