A few years ago, I lamented that there were no masters of my craft, from whom I could learn. The only way to improve was to delve more deeply into my ideas, alone.

The problem with doing this is that it usually isn't improvement, at least not directly. However, it is the only option I have. So, in the stumbling though this exercise, I will accidentally meander into places of small wisdom, but this is a slow and indirect process. And yes, I could learn about other trends, but I am interested in the fundamentals behind the craft and how to think about these systems and communicate those thoughts.

This development is further hampered by not having anyone around me who is also a student of the same craft. Not only am I without a master, but also without colleagues. It makes me wonder if this walk into the wilderness is a path toward enlightenment or a path toward madness. I guess the distinction will be decided by onlookers, once I reach the end of the path. The less we think about the implications of that reality, the better (so many thoughts which died in the cold...).

Recently, I have been thinking about how this is a problem with other parts of my life, too. When you are like me, favouring narrow and deep, as opposed to broad and shallow, things get tricky. It is difficult to find others which share in an esoteric interest (by definition), and even more difficult to find someone who has delved so deeply as to have become a master or at least colleague within the associated philosophy. I rarely meet someone who is even aware of the ideas I like to contemplate, much less someone who has really marinated in them. I am nothing special, these ideas are just not very popular.

I was talking to someone about their recent break-up, not long ago, and some of the misunderstandings and assumptions leading up to it reminded me how much I miss being able to talk about relationships in interesting ways. I guess that is a long-winded way of saying I miss what Taz brought to my life. Truly a master of polyamorous philosophy, well beyond where I was or where my previous master, I suppose that was Josh, had left me. She could honestly approach some of the more abstract questions related to the nature of all human connection in an honest, intelligent, yet still passionate way.

That is something I find to be a common barrier in most paths of discussion: All of human experience has an emotional element, even when largely a cognitive pursuit. This emotional element drives the passion of the humans involved (it is the calling of their heart, after all) but it can also become a barrier to protect assumptions they have deemed sacred or are not yet willing to question. Someone who has thought much of this is slower to allow their emotions to make them defensive, as they realize that the discussion does not threaten their position (they either know that they are well-reasoned or know why they have the emotional connection). Hence, they are quite happy to talk in more abstract terms about the meaning they want to reach and understand.

In an odd way, there is something comforting about a heated discussion between people leaving someone next to them with a sad look, only for them to respond with, "It is more complicated than that, and I understand why, so it can't be solved, and that is sad", when pressed to choose a side.

I feel alone in that those moments come too infrequently and I am terrified that I cannot know how many times I have been the cause of that disappointment in others,
...Nights