Motorcycles in a cage

Damn. 4 am here and I'm still wide awake. Ever have one of those nights when your brain is just going into overdrive even as you try to convince yourself to slide into hibernation? I think I think too much. Very troublesome, especially at times like this.

Maybe I'll go out and do touristy things in the morning. Head out to the Champs Elysee and chill, poke about the Eiffel Tower, banal things like that. Bring a book and make it a day.

Hmmm, let me think about what I can type about. Perhaps something along the lines of . . .

Thoughts are slipping from focus. Just whirling about, unable to pause and let me have a good look. Very disturbing. Perhaps it is a sign of progression. I recall when I was younger, I didn't think so much, really. I wasn't an introspective sort, just very chill. When things didn't work out, I just tossed it aside. I depended on others for inspiration. I lived through the works of science fiction and fantasy writers, never bothering to fabricate worlds of my own. As I progressed through high school and the army, my internal monologue suddenly became clearer to me, and it was fascinating. As if I were discovering a new person. The way I thought about things altered radically, and new perspectives came easily. The problem was that I never really knew what was real and what was false. I was not schizophrenic, but I was able to think through and understand so many different points of view that I could hardly discern which was my own true opinion.

That's interesting, isn't it? If I am able to perceive many different viewpoints, then how can any single one of them be uniquely mine? After all, if all of them are within my mind, then my mind has produced all of them, so I cannot help but know them all. As such, to label any single one as my actual unique opinion would be superficial. All of them are my opinions. How is it possible to assess which one is true?

Ooh, a topic at last. So, how can a person assess which of the thoughts in his head he agrees with? In a purely logical way, it is hardly possible. Every method has its own unique logic, which may not always be comprehensible to other points of view, but since I am capable of understanding it, the logic should be apparent to me as well. So which logic is superior? That would require a separate thought process to make such an assessment. This separate thought process must then be considered. Logic can hardly be its base, for it would be impossible to assess something using itself. If we did so, there would always be only one way of thinking about it, and all other forms of logic and their conclusions would be discarded out of hand, impossible to understand at all.

So what then? Morals? Morals are nebulous enough to be accepted as arbiters, I suppose. After all, morals are basically ideas that have been hammered into one's head by rote, more or less. To truly be a moral person in deed and thought, the basis of the morals cannot be questioned. To question one's own morals is to basically lose them. Sounds ridiculous? Look at it this way. Take a person who has to contemplate the appropriate behaviour every time a moral dilemma occurs. If there is a need to deliberate over an action, then there is always a possibility, however remote, that the action contrary to the pre-existing morals will be taken. After all, that is the point of deliberation, is it not?

So morals it is. If it is morals, then the question does arise of how it is that I cannot decide which of the thoughts in my head I really agree with. I think that is part of my problem overall. I do not really believe in very much, or care for anything, because I cannot decide what I think is true. If truth is a concept that has no real weight, then it is impossible to care for anything, for it is not truthful. How can one believe in something that is thought of as a lie?

The thing is, I keep running into situations where my feeble attempts at faith are shattered. True love is beyond my grasp, for I truly have not met anybody who I care about enough to change for. As I put it earlier today, my sense of self is too strong, to the point where I cannot really imagine anyone becoming important enough to make me change. I can see myself wanting to change, but weighing it off against my pride in being myself, it always loses out. On the other hand, true love shouldn't be about being someone else, should it? Ok, so true love is an empirical test, thus far failed.

Friendship. All I can say is, ha! Whenever friendships have been tested, they have frequently been found wanting. The slightest provocations bring a chilling, a breakdown. Most friends will only be your friend if you are constant in being what they first befriended. Reasonable, actually. But people change all the time. So I'm caught here between reason and sentiment. The trouble sometimes is that things change ever so clightly, and the relationship collapses, and my personality exerts itself, ensuring that I cannot be the only one trying to adjust. If the other party cannot accept that I am who I am, which is subject to change sometimes, then I am not about to force myself to shift back. That would be grovelling, which I do not do very well at all.

Oh, just thought of a brilliant analogy for my state of mind currently. It's like those circus things where some guy stands in the middle of a globular cage, with motorcycles whirling about the inside of the cage. I stand in the middle of my thoughts, unable to focus on any single one of them, afraid to reach out for fear of what I will find if I delve too deeply.

Cynical, some people say I am. I say I am only afraid of myself, my own mind, my own thoughts, my own emotions. Far better to withdraw from them, since I am not caught in them already, as is most of the world about me.