So you are sending to the vast web a message in a bottle, to find soulmates somewhere, or pen friends?

Any particular gender orientation in that search?

Note that there are better platforms than this one for finding a soulmate, but you must have tried many other platforms, so I guess why not try this one too... Still, let me recommend the lounge, and, mendaciously, 'my' music thread @ https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8898/deep-songs/latest/comment

It's a thread about lyrics. Many love songs in there... I just posted one for you.

I've read a couple of your posts now, and am still wondering what your age, sex and location are. Not a hint. It leads me to suspect your profile picture is not a photograph of you; and that you are in fact a 400 pound truck driver - suffering from the loneliness of the open road!

I'm alone because I don't trust anyone!

@Kaveski
Be patient,try to get out and meet people in real life.

I would say be careful about opening yourself up emotionally online. There are many trolls and nasty people online. Also many impatient dogmatic people.

In general look after your health,nutrition,exercise.
And don't overthink or worry too much.

The fact your trying this hard will alert your Soul Family that you are calling them.

Good luck,and take care.

Deep interpersonal connections are a myth. So, if you keep at this, it's not going to end well with you. Why the deep qualifier for interpersonal connections? What does that even mean? I manage with extremely superficial "interpersonal connections" It's I suppose less demanding on other people and many are willing to connect at that level which I find uplifting because they're really being generous with their time and, as they say, keeping it real!

Have you checked the statistics? Divorce rates were rising last I checked! Implying? The deep interpersonal connections you seek are simply a flash in the pan, they fizzle out faster than you can say Jack Robinson or it's all an illusion that sooner or later is broken into a million pieces which, if you turn out to be the losing party, you'll have to pick up and dispose of (preferrably safely).

All that said, given how unpredictable the world is, miracles do occur, people do win the jackpot! I suppose it's time for a basic math lesson. Impossible is not the same as improbable. Sometimes they look the same but the (subtle) difference may mean either you find your...er...soulmate or end up Waiting For Godot.

Although I agree with @Protagoras about the many trolls and nasty people out there, especially as you invite other private avenues of communication, and, online, that can be difficult to deal with, for the part of this forum, I have not generally observed much problem with emotion or vulnerability. It seems pretty well accepted round these parts.

It is only if you stake a philosophical claim of some sort here, that you should expect criticism and scrutiny. Purely friendly messages that don't really argue a philosophical point, are generally friendly received with friendly advise from different points of view, as already apparent in this thread.

My own friendly advice, having experienced when I was younger an analogous sense of disconnection from the people immediately around me (due to my longing for coherent principles, actions and real justice), is that connection with other people can, by definition, only really happen as part of a collective project (humans are a political animal, as Aristotle almost gets right).

Without some genuinely justified goal, "connections" in the modern world are the mere acting out of what people think are genuine connection (informed by mostly by movies). For instance, "bros" may act out what they perceive to be the bonds of brotherhood in a world war 2 platoon, fighting the evil Nazis (subconsciously, but more often than not with overt analogous symbolism and language of justice and missions and so on: see startup culture for this phenomenon on hyper-drive; or, more ironic still, acting out the bonds of brotherhood "gansta's" in sidelined communities create to deal with, or then a response to, systemic oppression propped up by the "bro" culture that mirrors them through the commodification and glorification of the ersatz sense of purpose of at least obeying no rules of an unjustified society: the dignity, ephemeral perhaps but arguably better than nothing, of being an autonomous moral agent in unjust circumstance).

The difference of course (and I think accurately described by the post-modernists, even if their proposed "cures" are worse in my view), is that a WWII platoon had genuine connection, a genuine mission, a genuine sense of mission (as much on the Nazi side as the allies!), and clear moral principle held in common, and an objective basis for that collective project. World War II veterans (on the winning side) had a life long feeling of accomplishment and bonds, despite trauma and loss that went with it, due to the, if not valid, commonly believed and justified goal. Take the veterans of not merely a losing side (where losing is shame enough; such as the Japanese), or then a side that lost (and could normally deal with that, such as World War I) but turns out the supposed objective basis of the cause evaporates (concentration camps, mass murders, etc. which most German soldiers on most front lines didn't know about, or then were in denial about, very solidly insofar as a sophisticated propaganda apparatus supported both the denial and the justifications of the atrocities if they were happening ... which they weren't, but if they were, well, only Jews, retards, and other undesirables). Likewise, the war in Vietnam, contemporary Iraq and Afghanistan; the experience of veterans is extremely sensitive to the perception of real justice of the cause.

What we can conclude of such contemplation -- and, even if they seem extreme, war is the most banal of all human pursuits and the most universal -- is that the mere experience of "close collaboration", "connection" in itself, cannot be divorced from the justification of the common goal. If we doubt later the purpose, the perception of the "bond" with collaborators is clearly impacted.

All this to say, clearly the purpose of collaboration must logically precede the search and construction of bonds of collaboration.

Joining a just war may indeed bring a lifetime sentiment of deep connection, purpose and accomplishment (even if one loses the war but the sense of justification is preserved!), however, the mere existence of such a psychological phenomena we may see play out in others cannot justify joining any war for any arbitrary cause. In this second case, it is clearly simply the theater representation of the first justified case; similar language and gestures may be used, and similar experiences encountered, but clearly it is not the same to kill for a just cause compared to some randomly selected cause; neither in the experience as a whole, nor the future reflections upon that experience. In other words, going to war for "the experience", regardless of the justification for the war, is a bad idea. Likewise, joining a startup for "the experience", regardless of the justification for the startup, is a bad idea. And so on and so forth until we have concluded joining any group at all, regardless of the justification for the group, is a bad idea.

What we are left with is the simple obvious questions in their simple and obvious order: What ends are justified? What ways of achieving these ends are justified? Who is worthwhile to cooperate with to achieve these ends? Where are these people? How do I find them? How do I know that they are who I think they are?

Any mistake in this chain of clear, simple and obvious questions: spells disaster, hardship, suffering, if not for oneself, then others.

https://www.ag.state.mn.us/consumer/Publications/OnlineDatingRomanceScams.asp

What did you post? I've been thinking about starting a completely pointless hipster chauvinist contest over this.


I dunno. I'm a pretty lonely guy. Do you like Black Tambourine and The Double Life of Veronique?

the ability of fully respecting other people's boundaries. — Kaveski

Yeah well, until you learn the virtue of disrespecting the boundaries of those who disrespect those of others and solving the problem we'll say, we're all just pigs living in sh*t. With no value or purpose whatsoever. Subtly, carefully, of course. Loud morons dwarf modulated scholars. Cheating cowards dwarf honest and brave men. Deceitful, cruel men often best the kind and trusting. Maybe you should go do something about it. With tact and intellect. What all the negative persons I describe would die to keep you from. And they say it's for your own good. You'll be happier not doing so. Perhaps there's some truth to their claims. But. Is it really all about you? If so, you're already on a path to becoming the worst of them.

:eyes:

Well I guess it is pretty safe to post the first post in a thread that has been dormant for a year. I don't know formats, forgive me if I'm not properly quoting. @bothius says that people need a common goal and mentions war. In the past religion also served that purpose, to socialize around common goals, and now without that common social grounding people are finding other ways to come together - but nothing is really serving that goal (although I fear political extremism seems to be the latest rallying cry to bring people together). There are global issues that someday may "push" us together. I work with refugees for example and trauma can both unite and splinter groups of people.

Humans do need a common social purpose and reasons to act in a group. Joining a group with a purpose is probably the best way to get to know like minded people. As this was a year ago I hope you managed to find your clan. :)

seems odd to dredge this particular thread up after a year or so as your first post. Are you the latest incarnation of @Kaveski?

No association (that I know of). New to the forum and it was the first post that came up :)