The Fundamentals of Individualism - New Book

Hello all,

I am posting the beginning to a new book which I have started composing recently, looking for any input/thoughts. The title is in the topic of this thread.

Here is the opening excerpt:

We will open this session with a few questions. What, in general, do we really mean when we speak of the individual? Or rather, what are the essential 'factors' which constitute individualism? The fundamental assumptions are often overlooked and the roots of said assumptions are never examined, and consequently never uplifted. The definitions of every 'word' leave the question, or, questioning possiblity of 'word-play' to be called-out. But what are our grounds for defining any given 'individual' to begin with? What, in other words, 'separates' the person so that he should be definible? Emotional stability or otherwise as been the long-standing 'proof' which has been used for many purposes. Emotions are the catalyst in those hoping to proof the existence of the individual 'soul/spirit' duality. But this is a falsehood! Once again we must question our grounds for definition. What is 'emotion' that is distict from anything else which leads to our defining? Could it not more easily be said that most 'words' are merely derived from other 'words' which only lead to abstract images? Emotion is the stronghold for which humanism has been built. Man now tightly wraps his arms around himself, claiming to 'have' feelings, which consequently define him and there is a not a thing which can be done about it. What is the essential difference from a 'feeling' and a 'thought'? No difference? Why have separate words? The continued duality not only reveals a lostness within the world, but more importantly within oneself. Seeing something clearly can only come when he has realized he has already seen. 'Dropping' everything, as it were, is the main possibility which it neglects. As care, Dasein 'clings' to itself, out of fear to lose itself. Dasein relies on that which is provable, measureable and explicitly 'showable' in one way or another. The agreements upon which he has founded upon select members of the 'they' only further his delusion. Dasein is sure to keep close its select members and the rest are 'not to know' him. Although it is rather impossible to define the 'line' for which one would cross from 'not knowing' someone to 'knowing', Dasein keeps this out of sight for he knows it is explicitly provable otherwise. Either to its select members or those of a passing crowd, Dasein is well aware that it must be present for all interactions. The temptation of 'explaining away' are always present, which presents a potentially never-ending issue, memebers of the 'they' are there for comparing notes, as the same they do. Dasein treats all of its ensuing encounters as 'other', even when it stops to ackowledge itself, he is seen as 'other'. For so long as Dasein ackowledges itself as an entity, he remains entangled. Subsequently, Dasein is sure to continue to 'prove' the existence of his own individuality, this is done in several ways. First, Dasein keeps a 'remembrance' of whichever 'thought' he last had upon the sight of any particular object. This goes especially for the 'they' and proceeds to influence his 'selection'. Withought taking special 'heed', Dasein can fall into the same trap, by refusing to think through the 'previously held' thought upon seeing each object. From the time Dasein was first aware of the possibility of interpreting itself as an entity this became an issue. Every 'word' is derived from an underlying theme, every underylying theme cannot be spoken of. When Dasein speaks to any member of the 'they', all that is understood is the underlying theme from whichever 'words' have been selected. That's not to say the Dasein's selection of 'words', but their selection of what has been spoken. The majority of the burden for Dasein is the task of deriving 'words' to be used in each underlying theme. Those which can be appropriated accurately by the 'they'. Dasein is 'tricked' into their concern of a response, insignificance is swept under the rug, and as such Dasein re-hashes derivitaves. Because the same underlying themes continue to 'arise', Dasein is tempted to derive the same 'words' for the sake of becoming lived by the 'they'. As such, Dasein forfeits its 'care-freeness' for the safety of their tent. Also, Dasein becomes addicted to 'pushing itself around' through the contemplating of 'different' derivities for its underlying themes, this as been often confused for 'thinking'.But this is not thinking, this is an attempt at thinking, but so long as the one who is attempting is hidden, no thoughts are to be brought forth. Underlying themes are known to each one and everyone, thus that-which has been characterized as 'communication' is possible. Dasein merely selects a 'word' which points to the already-known underlying theme, helping the other prove its existence. The levelling down of Be-ing can be attributed to 'having' to remain confined to the 'proving' of each underlying theme. Limiting possibilities, Dasein rages against itself.

Thank you for taking the time to read, live long and prosper.