I wrote a little about this on my website [here](http://ankit.fyi/about). You might enjoy this passage in particular related to your idea that you cannot prove:
> I think misunderstanding as an epidemic is rooted in how we’ve learned to consume information and how we haven’t learned how to digest it. This is one of the reasons I’m excited about the Internet, social media culture, and how we choose to express ourselves and connect with one another.
> I also think the best way to consume and digest information is through real human interaction. Even better if it’s with a non-judgmental lens of curiosity in understanding why people are the way they are, but it’s still pretty great when it’s just shooting shit about a common interest or sharing an experience.
> I have a dream that one day, Internet interactions will fuel more human interactions. That our default behavior will be to use this amazing access to information that we have to learn more, connect dots in constructive ways, understand others more deeply, and maybe even to grow more open minded to who each of us can become.
> Right now, though, the Internet feels like a place where people are throwing food at each other and taking shits on the sidewalk. I think we can do better.
An earlier draft of this essay had a whole section about communing with nature and what it meant to go for a quiet walk by yourself.
At its core, this whole essay is an ode to paying attention to yourself, and part of paying attention to yourself is paying attention to the environment that you are a part of—the space around you, the sounds you hear, the stimuli affecting your thoughts, etc. etc.
You're right! So much of this essay can find a mirror in Vedic, Jain, Buddhist and Taoist philosophies (and numerous other schools of thoughts and philosophies). I don't think my ideas here are original.
My hope was that this essay would find resonance amongst those who might have difficulty connecting with these ideas in more religious, spiritual, or philosophical contexts. It was one of my goals while writing this to make it as accessible and plainspeak as possible.
I'm sorry you're disappointed by the fact that I said "FaceTime" three times in a 6000 word essay about connection with oneself.
The essay is not predicated on you using Facebook, having an iPhone, using FaceTime, Zoom, or any specific program, but I think that'd be pretty clear to you if you read it before commenting.
My hope with the essay was primarily to provide a language, articulation and case to support the exploration of a relationship with self, but I definitely think it could use more substance in the area of "how to."
Would love to know more of what you think though!
What else do you think would be helpful that's missing from this? I've been thinking about writing something to supplement the essay with further resources, frameworks, and more tactical support for people who want to dig deeper into the essay.
(Also thx for the heads up about the link! The site is up, but the link was bad. Fixed it. Should be properly pointing to http://www.teawithstrangers.com now)
I think I may be looking for you or other articles to hand me the easy way out to help with connect myself. It may be that I need to spend more time with myself in solitude and figure it out.
> The passage you shared is beautiful, but it's not quite registering how the essay evoked it for you. Can you say more?
One thing I take away from the excerpt is that the person we present and feel ourselves as during interactions with others is not exactly the same as the person we are alone. There isn't necessarily an element of deceit to this. Instead, we should pay attention to both selves -- and to me much of your essay is about paying attention to the person we are when we're alone, and being aware of differences between the two selves, without necessarily needing to reconcile them.
We are like a beam of light which changes depending on the lens through which we project ourselves. The final form changes based on the situation (lens).
I think I would say we project different aspects of ourselves into lower dimensions (thoughts and words) depending on the transformation function (context into which we are projecting ourselves).
> I think I would say we project different aspects of ourselves into lower dimensions (thoughts and words) depending on the transformation function (context into which we are projecting ourselves).
Such a great way to articulate this. This is why I love HN.
Thanks for explaining! I entirely agree. We all have many versions of ourselves, and they are all still us! I'm of the mind, however, that who we are when we are alone serves as a starting block around which our many other facets form.
I aimed to make this essay as easy to digest as possible, and part of that effort involved eliminating labels, ideas or phrases that might have a lot of inconsistent associations across different readers' minds (e.g. "mindfulness")
Wow, this is a really thoughtfully written page. Thanks for sharing it Pamar. I'll want to take some time to really digest your writing and synthesis of others' perspectives on the topics.
