The Self and the Investment v.05

Whim doesn't define a person, an exercised whim might be a person's responsibility, but still doesn't define a personality. 

I'm not a psychologist but I concur to the idea that people's personalities are complex and unique. Unfortunately somehow the society believe that a person could be defined by their whim and that is the real person. Why?

There's the third person, the auditor, the consciousness, what about those sides of a personality how about them? So if you think you are your whim, then let there be that way. I define myself as I am officially, as what I clearly said, as what I clearly declare, other than that are unofficial and most often the incomplete me. 

That incomplete me might be mean, might be evil, might dictate what I wanted to do, but in the end what I did mostly not dictated by that side of me. Please human beings have the decency of bringing this brain capability to the table, please. 

Stop making assumptions about people's personalities based on some shallow aggregations, you yourself are too big for that, so don't put other people inside that small compartment. People have different ways of acting and discerning, a threatening monstrous capability and inclinations shouldn't define the entirety of a person. A soft person could have stolen from, robbed, and killed multiple people, that is more reliable of a sign (statistics) but even that might not be complete. 

The context upon what I'm saying is, I dislike how people could be punished by other people for their words' innuendos. Should I describe more? A tendency of a person to be hurtful is a part of a personality, but the personality it is not. Someone with a knife might be a robber, but might also be a chef, if you got rid of knives from everybody, then chefs wouldn't be able to cut with a knife.

Invest your identity in you that are clear, otherwise you that are clear is a lie.

------------------------------

If I were to create a company, it would be cool and hip to name it The Truth is the Protocol or TTITP or TTTP in the share market. But in case of somebody has taken the initial, I'm going to have to settle with TTIT, T_T

---------------------------------------

Group vs Individuals

It is really hard to make a complicated group. Individuals lived with themselves for the rest of their lives, their traits and fragments of their consciousness were fond with each other and they grew together. Groups that could equal that is too rare to make a consideration. You lived with each other for how long? Do you even like one another and willing to grow together? 24x7?

So if you identify yourself as a group, then that group's characteristics, that aggregation, that simple easy to blend commonalities are going to be huge part of your individual. Don't, well that might be true, like your real hair would be black if you're an asian or your body weak if you're a woman, but don't let your personality revolves around it, around the blackness of the hair, and the weakness of the body, cause there's so much more to you. Made this mistake and along the way people couldn't but to deny their exposures (had to lie), because they would be too vulnerable... their mistake.

(be a member of a group only for a necessity or a context, after that be a distinct individuals even in front of the "enemy". Never miniscule our membership as living beings, and as human beings, as creatures of mass, as biological organisms... so many groups we're missing out to be a part of just for the sake of being a member of an exclusive constraint).

----------------------------------------

Being part of a group is lovely, being part of a million and trillion groups are million and trillion times the loveliness, being part of millions and trillions and more of advanced groups are (...) times the loveliness, and I want that. It is so underwhelming being limited to just one or two unsynergized fake shallow group or groups. 

No one don't want that, after all, but the protocol is the Truth, who then wants to acknowledge that?