logicp_writings/Book/RejectTheSelf.md

The Journey to Rejecting the Self

Basic Primary fundamental biological behaviour

• Resource requirements
• Threat of material harm
• Requirement to endure certain hardship
• Realization of death
• Realization that some come to view death as an escape from life
• If some believe life must be escaped, then that means they believe life is not worth living
• Existence is a rejected proposition
• Why to have any experience - it would be better to have not had experience / to not know of there being any experience to be had

Becoming aware

To become cognizant of the fact that another being has rejected the proposition of life brings about certain awareness. If one is to reject life, then it must be thought about:

• Are there similarities to my experience or structure of reality?

If, indeed, they concluded that such an experience is not worth having, then should I suspect that of my own life? Why would reality cause something to occur that should not have been? That would make my life a mistake, and its prevention a moral good.

There are obviously many ways by which one might come to such a macabre conclusion, but how to act on such a realization when, indeed, one can never be sure as to whether it affects oneself?

Being the Wrong Thing

You can try to mitigate biology. You can use physical therapy and exercise to recover frmo a terrible injury, use anti-inflammatories to perform an important task for which you are otherwise in no condition to perform, use a ladder to overcome a height insufficiency, use prosthetics if you are missing a limb, etc. But to ignore biological reality is something completely different.

Ignoring Biology

Defenders of the faith will say that no one is ignoring biology, but that our understanding is becoming more refined, and that we are simply better able to treat and address a larger pool of deficits, or ailments. That is obviously and genuinely problematic, whereas I have always maintained that the most promising perspective with which to approach the proposition of changing one' sgender is with the understanding that it is not the treating of a disorder, but an aspiration to be most explicit in transcending biological limitations. That is, not to say that you should be of a particular form, but that technology and safeguards are sufficient for this type of transformation, and that it is an evolution.

That we are at a place in our development where we can pursue otherwise is a very ego-centric endeavour. The difference being that this gives the subject a new challenge with respect to maintaining a grounding in reality.

I doth Protest

This demonstrates another form of Critical Theory's need to use their one tool for every scenario. Gender Studies and Queer Theory have identified queering as the means of blurring the heteronormative environment and redefining its terms in order to bring about new behaviour which escapes the oppression of the system. The otherwise unmodified state of the system is oppression, and it is an oppression of all those who live within it. All are oppressed in some way, but most are made comfortable or are somehow privileged by it, negating their ability to realize their oppression and gain the perspective necessary to rise up and overcome. For those who are sufficiently oppressed and insightful enough to notice the true nature of the system, however, they can't help but declare their identity as being one which understands this. What does this yield?

1. Not corrupted by the system -> able to be your own
2. Standing against what is wrong So, then, their very identity is an expression of their belief that the system should relinquish its power. It is a demand for change and an insistence that one is suffering more. To have suffered more suggests that one is more deserving of remediation, and also suggests that one has personal insights into the exact chief concerns of the day.