Part 43: (Obergefell v. Hodges (Gay Marriage), the Contextual Self and the Self Coupled): Dialogues on a Philosophy for the Individual

(Pix (c) Larry Catá Backer 2015)

With this post Flora Sapio and I (and friends from time to time) continue an experiment in collaborative dialogue. The object is to approach the issue of philosophical inquiry from another, and perhaps more fundamentally ancient, manner. We begin, with this post, to develop a philosophy for the individual that itself is grounded on the negation of the isolated self as a basis for thought, and for elaboration. This conversation, like many of its kind, will develop naturally, in fits and starts. Your participation is encouraged. For ease of reading Flora Sapio is identified as (FS), and Larry Catá Backer as (LCB).

The friends continue their discussion in which Betita Horm Pepulim and Flora Sapio respond to Larry Catá Backer's point about the American Supreme Court's gay marriage decision, the individual, and coupling. language, and to the friends join in.  

Contents: HERE. 

FS: Oh my God! Too many questions! I need some time, but not too much time to respond. For now I will all say that it all depends on the individuals.

BHP: Exatamente!  Dear Larry Catá Backer, and friends Flora Sapio Imperatrix Maris and Ulisses Schwarz Viana , about their questions,Larry, I can only speak for myself. I was married for almost all my life! Rssrsrsrs My first husband was my first boyfriend. I married very young, I was eighteen years old. I was not pregnant. I got married because I wanted to. He was ten years older than me, he had a very domineering a way of being . This type of temperament did not work with me. We were together for ten years, between dating and marriage. After my divorce, I vowed to myself never marry again. My oath lasted two years. I was hanging out with a friend, and one day when I arrived at my house after a day of work, I found my house full of different things, it took a few minutes for me to realize that he had moved into my house. This happened thirty years ago. He always knew how I am. I'm monogamous. I believe it. But on regards the rest of the common procedures to weddings, I have no talent for cooking, I dont like ironing, do not like to clean the house. I love to watch TV, but I'm selfish, I can not and do not want to share my remote control. My time are peculiar. I work much, i study much , I like working, I like to work in my garden, I like listening to music, to reading and to watching TV. I like my husband, too. But we sleep in separate rooms. Each of us has his bedroom and his bathroom, and each of us is responsible for its space and life. We like to be together, when we feel good, and when we want stay together, foremost we respect each other a lot. I feel free. I do what I like. I live the life I want to live. Being married, for me, is not a problem. My daughters are already large, have their own lives, and are my super partners. I know that my life is not parameter. But because of the life I have I say that being married is not a premise for lose your identity. A marriage is a partnership. It is a sum. Not a subtraction. A number can always be divided. And he will continue to be a number. This is a fact. Keep the own identity is fundamental in any kind of partnership. Otherwise, it is not a partnership. A partnership sum, not zero. As time went on, I realized I love rituals. All kinds of rituals that allow me to celebrate. A wedding is one rituals. I believe marriages and / or couplings are interesting and can be very cool. The wedding was a usual convention. Today it is an option. I think we have reached a stage of social transformation in which people are free to adopt the life they want to have. There is no more to "obligation" social , there is no more to the necessity of accountability of actions. Explain! Just for to ourselves! If this were the case. I think freedom is to allow yourself to be who you want. If you not killing, not stealing, and not be a traitor, in the broad sense of this word, mistakes are relative.

 Well, my friends, now I exposed myself fully in the Internet. rsrsrsrsr But that's okay. It's for a good cause. The issue is not me, it's not about my life , this it's only more a possibility, one more reality.

 I do not identify, in nothing, with Gordon Hinckley, but this thought if literally interpreted is very beautiful: "Marriage, in its truest meaning is an egalitarian society where one does not exercise dominion over the other, but they both encourage and help each other in all the responsibilities and aspirations that may have". And another:

I am a free man - and I need my freedom. I need stay alone. I need to meditate alone[...] I need sunshine and street paving stones without people, without conversation, I need to stay face to face with me, only with the music in my heart as partner. What they you want from me? When I have something to say, I put it in words. When I have something to give, I give it. His indiscreet curiosity makes my stomach turn! their compliments humiliate me! Your tea poisons me! I owe nothing to anyone.I answer only for God - this, if He existed!

Henry Miller. And another:

"Sing and dance together, and be happy, but let stay alone, Like the lyre strings, that same separated, they vibrate in the same harmony." Khalil Gibran.

LCB:  Aaaaah, Betita, but it is to the integrity of that state of being alone, in one's own company, that oneness with oneself that is of the self and not a reflection of the aggregate others projected into the self that is the stuff of great challenge.  We move between disassociated madness and the self referent moored against but not a derivation of the societal or undifferentiated self.  It is to the shaping of that interior triadic relation of the self with the self that we must consider more carefully.  

Aaaaah, Betita, mas é para a integridade desse estado de ser sozinho, na própria companhia, essa unidade com a si mesmo que é opf o auto e não um reflexo dos outros agregados projetados no auto que é o material de grande desafio. Movemo-nos entre a loucura dissociada ea auto referente ancorado contra, mas não uma derivação do auto societal ou indiferenciado. É para a formação dessa relação triádica interior do eu com o eu que devemos considerar com mais cuidado.