>. Still it is remarkable how these processes of ideation or what we
> call "feelings" are regarded as somehow unknowable, impossible to express
> without poetry or an aura of spirituality. . Some people
> who train their virtual beings as a matter of course (actors are one
group
> who do this in a workmanlike way) have a very different physical demeanor
> to me.
I don't agree. I have acted and I have not acted, I can't say I looked
different when I did or didn't, it had nothing to do with the surface, it
was an experience like working in a bank or walking when my toe was broken,
it took more effort, but the effort wasn't in being a "virtual being." What
do you mean by a workmanlike way? What you seem to mean although you don't
realize it is that because it's work that you can digest the end result of
you can stomach it. I find that it is exactly that people want to think of
"feelings" in the way that you describe them to be somehow of an "outside
spirituality", the way that you do, that makes me feel I can't express and
must actually supress what I think and how I like to express things. People
get overwhelmed by the density and speed. I have to overcompensate for the
littleness by being overly quiet. Your sense of awe makes me feel very
frustrated. It is not that you are being cliched, it is that you are saying
things like "these people" "these processes"--- you are placing every topic
of your discussion on the outside of the inner ring of the "we" of your
life, you are externalizing, YOU are making a spirituality of something all
sorts of people experience as part of the way their minds think all the
time. YOU are externalizing what is not external at all. It is very
frustrating. I don't mean to attack you as yourself, rather the sort of
general phenomenon of this externalization of what is of course internal.