Life, my thoughts, is it good? Edit it for me?

I was just talking to a friend of mine and had this pop into my head. That's pretty much how everything happens, either it's a movie or a conversation on here or with my friend. This is my idea on life. What I want to know is this: Could this be considered a philosophy of life? If so is it good, what do you think? Does it need to be edited? If so can you help me with that without straying away from the overall meaning, if it's a good "philosophical" idea on life?

Your "life process" is a circle. You start out surrounded in the middle of it, influenced by everything. As you age, mentally, you move towards the outside edge; where there is more freedom. You're not surrounded anymore, then you have the opportunity of the "other side," a higher consciousness of one's self and their enviroment. Some-times though people get consumed in the middle and never reach the other side.

[Scott]

This seems like a metaphor, but if so I cannot figure out what is meant by the metaphor.

How does this metaphor differ from any Buddhist/enlightenment thought? It sounds a bit like an inadequately formulated way of reaching nirvana.

This seems like a metaphor, but if so I cannot figure out what is meant by the metaphor.

It's just saying some people conform from lack of ability to use their head, for some not all situations, and others develope their own way of life.

How does this metaphor differ from any Buddhist/enlightenment thought? It sounds a bit like an inadequately formulated way of reaching nirvana.

I don't know anything about Buddhism really just some things, I haven't studied it at all. I'm just now a couple months into things like this, but yeah it pretty much is enlightenment, except I don't believe in reincarnation so that would be excluded. It's also not really a hightened spiritual knowledge or insight. Just being able to think for yourself, know reality behinds the lies that are told. It's not a way to reach anything it's just saying some people do or don't. I can't, really no one can, teach anyone the process of that. You can push them in the general direction, maybe prod their thoughts to question and further along their journey.

[Scott]

In some ways, it is true that 'lack of using one's head' leads to conformity. Young children learn from imitation, for instance.

However, I suspect these ideas are too vague to have such a definitive connection. Conformity comes in many forms. and 'lack of using one's head' can mean many things.

One thing to consider is that teenagers are known for going through a rebellious, non-conformist stage. Actually, young children go through an interesting analogous stage sometimes referred to as the terrible twos. In some ways, this might stem from them trying to assert their individuality. However, it also seems that as people mature and their brains finish developing in the early 20s and they start to 'use their head more' that they become more willing to conform.

It seems like when I was in school and now that I'm out and the people around me are all joining the masses in some way or another. Kids are adopting the "thug/gangster" persona, rap music is corrupting them and others of different ages. Then the older ones, kind of like my brother and my friend's family members, think if you don't go by society you aren't "grown" up. I'm also talking about being together with society, when older, you think what is only important is whatever the consensus is. Now like I said this isn't everyone, but a wide majority. At least with the people I have encountered. It seems like, to me, that you get labeled unreal, a dreamer, ungrown, and once you get called that anything else you do is considered part of that label. Like if you were to be called insane.

I agree with much of what you say Scott, and it's true that "rebellion" are symptomatic for these different phases in life.

However, there are huge differences in the way people go through this. Society drags young men through the gate to manhood in order for them to contribute like all other members of society, because you have to in order to live a sustainable life. To survive you have to make money. The age's you describe, in lack of a good English word for it, I hope you understand what I mean with the "assertive or "despite-age"" where you don't want to do things just because people tell you you should do it. However some people, (and I consider myself one of them, thats why I started taking an interest in philosophy and social sciences and so on), does this in a more reflected manner. Which believe me, not many people actually does. I myself at least find it hard to conform with a society which is clearly dysfunctional. A post-modern development which the way I feel it brings human away from it's true authentic nature. I'm not going to go deeper into that, my point is that "rebelling", at least my idiosyncrasy of the word, has some bad connotations with it, a kind of view of a young person that the more mature persons look a bit down on as some assertive unreflected punk. And for me it's kind of the opposite. I think it's essential to evaluate and reflect over how you believe life should be lived and if the life you're forced to live is actually for the best. And to do this in an inquisitive and reflected manner I think is essential as a human being in order to actually have a progressive society and not contribute to some other persons definition of progress (which in many instances is based on personal profit). That's why I think young people today conform way to quickly and rashly. People have to stop up and actually ask those essential questions and dive under the surface of everyday conduct and not just surf on the wave of life in a feeling of despair, and just accepting that as how life should be.

Your "life process" is a circle. You start out surrounded in the middle of it, influenced by everything. As you age, mentally, you move towards the outside edge; where there is more freedom. You're not surrounded anymore, then you have the opportunity of the "other side," a higher consciousness of one's self and their enviroment. Some-times though people get consumed in the middle and never reach the other side.

There are many perspectives to reality.

It seems the above describes the typical normal life process of any person. First the child is confined in the womb, in a room, house, neighbourhood, planet, universe and one's consciousness expands as one widens one's horizon to the 'outer edges' with age. In this case, there is a freedom of thought and physical movements.

However, with the incremental expansion of knowledge and physical access to the outer edges, there is also the possibility of increasing neurosis and psychosis. This is because the individual human is so fallible and fragile in contrast to a knowledge of the complex external world at the outer edges. When one cannot cope with such reality, there is anxiety, escapism, pessimism, etc. In this case, moving to the outside edge increases on anxieties.

To cope with the above anxieties, there is the recommended 'know thyself' (Socrates, et. al). This is an inward journey into oneself rather than moving into the outer edges.

Buddhism do have the concept of the 'other shore', but it has to do with letting go of the existing baggage when reaching the 'other shore' which do not imply any outer edge. Buddhism is about developing higher consciousness of one's self to the extent of realizing there is actually no self. In anycase, it more of an inward journey rather than an outer one.

It would appear there is a necessity for an inward journey in addition to an outer one.