Why start writing?
Starting to write in a place like this is complex. You’re new, no one knows you, and you hope to make some sort of impact. Nothing more egocentric than that. I reviewed some posts by others who already have a somewhat strong community and an established space, with the intention of taking ideas from their content and applying them. What a mistake! None of it fit my style, and I felt like I was betraying myself.
That’s when I realized that the most important thing nowadays is to be true to oneself. It doesn’t matter if one is new or old in a space. What matters is starting from the bottom and staying true to who you are. Now, the problem is defining who one is. That’s the fundamental problem of human identity, and it’s something that is often taken as a cliché in different media outlets. Other times, it’s trivialized in “coaching” and “self-help” books, which are aberrations with ideas as deep as a puddle. To know oneself is such a complex and profound matter that it can never be answered simply, without breaking something inside and without making mistakes to some extent, because as Heraclitus said, “You can never step into the same river twice.”
What does it mean to know oneself?
Knowing oneself is an imperative from antiquity. The phrase "know thyself" was already inscribed on the temple of Apollo at the sanctuary of Delphi. The act of knowing oneself is a kind of enigmatic mantra that clouds our vision at first, only to give us an even deeper clarity: knowledge is something that surpasses ourselves. We may come to know something, but only partially, since everything undergoes changes, transitions, and constant transformations. Examples of this are that we are not the same beings who once inhabited our parents’ homes in our childhood, and we are not the same after reading a book. Science is also not something fully known; in fact, what allows science to progress is the incompleteness of its knowledge.
Sometimes, it can be terrifying not to know oneself, not to know one’s limits, qualities, and defects (yes, I used the word “defect,” which is considered politically incorrect) that are present in our lives as imperfect beings. But for me, the idea of never fully knowing oneself is fascinating, as it opens up all kinds of possibilities and daring ventures, where the "being" is not castrated or tied to an immutable essence that limits, constrains, and breaks everything. It would be terrible if we were to know ourselves fully and limit everything we are to that complete knowledge of ourselves. Great works like those of Plato, Shakespeare, Cervantes, Borges, Lovecraft, Poe, Kafka, Rilke, and many others would never have seen the light if human beings could know themselves in their entirety.
Obviously, we must reflect on ourselves. We should take advantage of the time alone at home, the moment of unease after finishing a book, to reflect on our own existence. We should use our leisure time to analyze ourselves, to explore and think about ourselves again and again, both as individuals and as human beings. We should put distractions aside and avoid wasting the limited time we have in life, which is really very short. After thirty, everything accelerates, and life is consumed in the blink of an eye. Trying to know oneself in a world like the one we live in is a kind of revolutionary act.
Knowing oneself means leaving oneself behind to try to know oneself in solitude and community. Knowing oneself is a complex act of reflection that requires courage, attention, and energy, which are usually available only for the entertainment offered by the world of Hypnos, the Greek god of sleep, who wants us dulled, foolish, and docile, so that we can be manipulated. Knowing oneself is a heroic act that allows individuals to come a little closer to freedom and build happiness in terms of Aristotle, where gratification may come only at the moment of death.
Fidelity to oneself
At this point, it is necessary to return to the path of what I mentioned at the beginning: fidelity to oneself. In my case, I could not be faithful to myself if I copied or created content with which I don’t identify. I have never been a person who says or writes things in which I do not believe; that, to me, is entirely incoherent. In the end, fidelity and coherence go hand in hand. It is impossible to be faithful if there is no coherence between what is said, what is thought, and what is done. Unfortunately, self-betrayal is something that is in vogue, and when one has clear and non-negotiable principles, politically incorrect labels are attached. In my community, the most common labels are radical, fascist, and misogynist. That doesn’t bother me at all.
If I’m labeled for defending and acting in accordance with what I think and express, that’s fine by me; it’s a label I deserve. However, there is something those people who tend to consider themselves morally superior don’t quite understand, and it is that labels are temporary. Labels change with the political climate and with the new ideas a community adopts. I have clear principles, and I defend the humanities as something that rescues people from their own nihilism and meaningless misery. I defend the belief in a Christian God because all of Western society, whether we like it or not, has a Christian heritage in its conduct that they are trying to destroy. I know Western society is in crisis, and that doesn’t scare me because, in the end, I am a person who is a mixture of different parts of the world, and if my ancestors survived, I will too.
To conclude, I could write about cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin, and bullish and bearish markets with their different cycles (I’ve been involved since 2019). I could talk about NFT technologies, the new trends emerging in the TON network, and different emerging projects like Grass. It would be easy for me to talk about my past experiences with different NFT games that have fallen into popular oblivion, like “Plants vs. Undead,” “Crypto-Zombies,” “Wanaka,” or “Block Monsters.” I could also talk about data engineering or cybersecurity, but I wouldn’t be staying true to my current concern: defending the utility of the useless for capital.
That’s my purpose. My sword and shield are available to defend what I am (or believe I am) and what is valuable to me: philosophy, art, literature, psychology, history, and the humanities in general. This space is for me a trench, where I can say what I think without being censored, unlike the third-world country to which I belong. Maybe not many people read me, and not many will reach this point, but if at least one or two people can take seriously the idea of knowing oneself as a counterculture, where the humanities, with their uselessness, cultivate curiosity and, consequently, the spirit, along with Christian principles that support a real identity, I’ll be convinced that I’ve found the right place.At the end of all this reflection, I can say that I wish to write in a new space like this because I don’t know myself or the community, but it is a profound exercise I do daily, supported by all that has no price but holds great value in Kantian terms. I see great potential in these decentralized, uncensored spaces that allow expression in a more beautiful way. And if I could sum up in a few words what I’ve written here, I would have to quote one of my favorite poems, which goes like this:
"A glimpse from the gutter
can become a complete worldview
rebellion consists of gazing at a rose
until your eyes are reduced to dust"
评论 (0)