A Contemplative Soul

One of the "problems" of getting too much into philosophy, sociology, anthropology, psychology and other fields that question the structures of the human condition itself is the fact you start to notice that much of what society believes and proposes are illusions, even things that felt unavoidable or unchangeable start to collapse after a certain point, there is no comeback. That's why isolation start to become an unavoidable thing for many writers and thinkers, not because they think they are superior or that they are scared or suspicious of society, but because much of what constitutes society are mere hallucinations.

When I look at some of the current "intellectual people" and see how limited, shallow, performative and insincere they are. I don't feel hatred or frustration, instead I feel pity, pity because it feels like the current society turned self-lying into a default practice, genuineness, depth and complexity are not about performing to others, because when you find something that's indeed genuine, profound or complex, you don't need audience to confirm its impact, because the discovery itself already rewards you, the discovery itself sustains its weight.

I don't know if it is just me, but I have noticed nearly everywhere it's always the same pattern, when I try to debate a complex a topic, specially when related to sensitive themes, it's always about who will win and who will lose, even if it requires anger, insulting, lying, defaming and attacking, it's almost always about who is better, who has the highest knowledge or moral code, I miss the deeper debates which are not about who will win or lose, but what can we learn from it, what we can build together through our ideas, how far can we go, where do we agree and where do we disagree, and how can we change it, I miss the rich debates where we can enrich our minds and rethink our views about life, faith, science and art, I miss the debates which could make us feel changed and improved even after proven wrong, because what mattered the most was not the winner or loser, but the process itself, the ideas flowing, combining, dissecting, building and rebuilding. Nowadays, nearly everywhere, debates feel more like battles of egos than two thinkers exploring the uncountable possibilities in the world of ideas. I believe the exercise of questioning someone within a conversation should stimulate instead of attack, something like "where do you want to go with it?" or "develop it more", questioning should be an invitation to more reflection in hope of reaching something relevant and genuine, like two or more individuals trying to build something meaningful. In short, cooperative discussions are more productive than competitive ones, because they focus in exploration of ideas instead of ego clashes, it seems like the obsession with competition hinders genuine exchange and generation of knowledge.