1. Philosophical foundations of the idea of education. The essence and meaning of education. G.V.F. Hegel on the philosophy of education (based on the work “Philosophical Propaedeutics”).
2. Differences and similarities between education and upbringing. Education as a holistic process. The sacred meaning of the education process.
3. Directions in the philosophy of education and their main representatives: empirical-analytical tradition, critical-rationalistic direction, humanitarian directions.
4. Philosophical and anthropological foundations of the educational process.
Topics of reports:
1. Education in ancient philosophy.
2. Education in medieval philosophy.
3. Education in the philosophy of modern times.
4. The philosophical culture of a teacher as an integral part of his professional competence.
5. Education as a cultural phenomenon and social institution.
1. Hegel G.V.F. "Philosophical propaedeutics".
Essay:
1. Human education: violence or desire for good?
2. A well-mannered person is born twice?
Seminarskoe 9.
1. Definition of ethics. Morality and ethics. Metaphysical foundations of ethics.
3. Passions of the soul and their transformation into virtues and vices.
4. Aristotle’s teaching on virtues and vices in the Nicomachean Ethics.
5. The problem of moral choice and moral responsibility of action.
6. The main motives of actions and ways of justifying them in the history of ethics.
7. Soloviev V.S. about the primary data of morality (based on the work “Justification of the Good: Moral Philosophy”).
Topics of reports:
1. Heteronomous ethics.
2. Theonomic ethics.
3. Autonomous ethics.
4. Formal ethics.
5. Absolute ethics.
6. Relative ethics.
7. Eudaimonic ethics.
8. Hedonistic ethics.
9. Utilitarian ethics.
10. Perfectionist ethics.
12. Definitions of concepts: moral values, categories, ideals, moral (moral) standards, regulations.
Summary of primary sources for mastering the topic:
1. Aristotle “Nicomachean Ethics”.
2. Soloviev V.S. "Justifying the Good: Moral Philosophy."
3. Berdyaev N.A. "On the purpose of man: The experience of paradoxical ethics."
Essay:
1. The purpose of man: struggle or submission to passion?
2. Are a person’s motives the mirror of his soul?
Sample abstract topics:
1. Discussion about the origin of philosophy.
2. Mythology and philosophy as forms of spiritual exploration of the world.
3. The formation of philosophical knowledge in Ancient China. The dialectic of the doctrine of the forces of “yang” and “yin” and its reflection in art.
4. Ideas of ancient Greek philosophy about space and man (based on the works of A.F. Losev). The influence of the idea of space on the artistic thinking of antiquity.
5. Parmenides' doctrine of being.
6. Philosophical meaning of the aporia of Zeno of Elea.
7. Philosophical teaching of Pythagoras about number as the beginning of the world.
8. The theory of the state in the philosophy of Plato.
9. The main epistemological and ethical problems of the philosophy of Socrates. The influence of Socrates' ideas on the development of ancient philosophical thought.
10. Aristotle's ethical views. The doctrine of education.
11. Natural philosophy of the Renaissance.
12. The formation of a new paradigm of European thinking in the philosophy of the 17th century. (F. Bacon, B. Spinoza).
13. The teaching of R. Descartes on the four rules of method (based on the work “Discourse on Method”).
14. The main problems of modern empiricism.
15. The theory of social contract in the philosophy of the Enlightenment.
16. Basic ideas of the philosophy of values N.O. Lossky.
17. The problem of M. Scheler’s hierarchy of values.
18. The idea of “revaluation of all values” in the philosophy of F. Nietzsche.
19. The essence of the conflict between culture and life.
20. Causes of the crisis of modern culture.
21. Philosophical understanding of the problem of the relationship between society and the state.
22. Main features and features of Russian philosophy of law.
23. Main stages in the development of the philosophy of law.
24. The problem of the relationship between law and legal consciousness.
25. The essence of crime as a form of violation of law.
26. Philosophical problem of economy.
When we gain faith in ourselves, then we find the same in other people, life partners...
The mirror of personality and the looking glass of the soul
Each of us, sooner or later, learns a lesson in our lives called trust or self-belief. I believe, that means I know. If I don't know myself, how can I recognize and mirror another person? Namely, it is in such ups and downs and conflicts that the essence of our nature is revealed.
When we gain faith in ourselves, then we find in other people, life partners, a feeling of the same quality/quality/resonance. For no one has canceled the Law of the Mirror or Reflection.
“Man, as if in a mirror, the world has many faces.
He is insignificant - and he is immeasurably great!
Omar Khayyam
What do we demonstrate - the imperfection of a limited and ignorant personality or the maturity and humanistic orientation of a developed individuality under the shadow of a bright soul?
The mirror of personality and the looking glass of the soul, by analogy with the famous character Alice from Through the Looking Glass, often create a point of friction - internal conflict, which is the catalyst for our relationship with ourselves and the world.
The duality of the soul and personality is the field of individual experience of each person in which he manifests his best or worst qualities through serving himself/people, bringing light/love or serving himself through the manipulation of other people.
THEORY AND LAW OF MIRROR
“Why do you always say: “Don’t bury”? - Alice finally asked with annoyance.
-What am I burying? And where? - You buried your mind! And I don’t know where!
Lewis Carroll, "Alice Through the Looking Glass"
Charles Cooley's theory - the theory of the social mirror or "mirror of personality" comes down to the fact that by comparing oneself with others, a person develops his own opinion from the assessments of other people. Formation of assessment is associated with reward. Actions that are encouraged in a person can be further developed:
We analyze how people treat us.
We analyze how we feel about this assessment.
We analyze how we respond to this assessment.
Sociologist Charles Cooley used the concept of the “mirror of personality,” putting forward the idea that an individual’s self-awareness reflects the assessments and opinions of the people with whom he interacts.
This idea was later taken up by George Herbert Mead and Harry Stack Sullivan. Mead believed that a person's self-awareness is the result of his social interactions, during which he learns to look at himself as if from the outside, as an object. Moreover, the decisive importance for self-awareness is not the opinion of individual people, but of the “generalized other” - the collective attitude of an organized community or social group.
In Duetics, the Mirror theory takes the form of the Mirror Law, which means mastering the skills or discovering the ability to find and reflect strengths, accept and work on imperfections.
PRINCIPLE OF REFLECTED VALUES
In psychology and sociology, the concept of the “mirror” is known as “principle of reflected assessments”. According to her, we see ourselves as other people see us (!?). The only question is which of the others exactly. After all, different people have contradictory opinions about us. Whose opinion will be significant for us depends on many factors. First of all, this is due to the age of the person.
- For children, for example, the opinion of parents and teachers may be more significant.
- For adults, these can be the opinions and assessments of spouses, friends, colleagues.
In addition, different people, depending on gender and age, rely on the opinions of different others. For example, John Hoelter, surveying American teenagers - high school students, found that girls are more focused on the assessments of their peers, while boys rely on the opinions of their parents.
IMPERFECTION OF PERSONALITY
Personality is a field of human experience, including the unconscious and subconscious levels and a close connection with the emotional and mental bodies of a person, which in turn influence the etheric and dense physical bodies.
The imperfection of the personality, uncontrolled and not centered in the soul, has its distinctive features:
desire for dominance and manipulation
pride/feeling of being “chosen”/superiority over others
ambition
egoism/egocentrism
feeling of disunity/separateness/lack of unity/love for the whole.
In other words, we all have the qualities of an imperfect personality, albeit in different proportions. Therefore, it is not always easy not to use personal egocentric tools, especially when they are “always at hand.”
But there is one interesting BUT. And this “but” is that when a person “gets tired” of the pleasure/displeasure swing, which is largely an automatic reaction of the collective consciousness multiplied by his own childhood complexes and limitations, he becomes more and more individualized, latently reacting to spiritual impulses.
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUALITY
« Harmony is the essential quality of the soul and its mirror,
manifested reflection - personality».
Personality, etymologically, from the point of view of Duetics, is devoid of a clear direction for conscious creation. She appears as love exploring part of the new body consciousness. In other words, personality is a field of human experience, limited by external and internal tools of perception and the lack of a holistic picture of one’s own sense of self, characteristic of many incarnations of the soul.
In Duetik, individuality is seen as manifestation of the soul through a personal vehicle. Etymologically, individuality represents a person as a unique seeker of new roads of interest, inspired by the exploration of duality. I mean, individuality is the Soul manifesting itself as the duality of “I” and “not-me” or dynamic interest arising in the individual according to dual creation.
Individual development contains a consistent program for the development of the soul, which involves three phases:
In other words, when other people's mirrors do not produce the desired change, the person begins to turn his attention more and more to his own mirror in an attempt to look through the looking glass.
And then, as if by magic, the realization comes that attention should be directed not to the external, because it is often distorted, but to the reflection of the internal in the external. Because this is how our value perception of the world is formed. Everything must be passed through oneself, like a feeling-knowing sponge or sieve. Only our higher “I” is the measure of all things.
DO YOU KNOW YOUR MIRROR REFLECTION?
“Our world is a huge mirror that reflects our worldview and sense of self.”
Let's try to answer a number of questions I propose. In turn, I will give them my interpretation.
What is a mirror when we don't look into it? In other words, do we exist without mirror reflection?– Of course, we as a soul always exist, but bodily-personal experience has the temporal and spatial framework of a specific life.
How different are we from what we see and how we feel?– Our mental image of ourselves can be very different from how we feel emotionally and physically. It also often differs from the beautiful and bright beginning that exists in each of us. In addition, other people can see what is hidden from ourselves.
How does external form reflect our essence?– The body is, of course, the temple of the soul. And in what form we maintain our temple - we honor its needs (not only healthy food and drink), but also good rest, physical activity, or ignore them, depends on the ability to express the soul. It’s no secret that illness is the soul’s way of reaching the individual.
Is there an imbalance between inner sense of self and outer expression?– Often there is, because this is how the soul strives for harmony or balance.
And what is our looking glass that hides both dark spots and bright faces?– It is very diverse. In my numerous sessions of Energy Information Healing, I have been convinced of this many times. Moreover, this world is amazing and unpredictably beautiful, even if we explore its “dark sides,” for we always have the opportunity to bring the light of awareness and transformation.
Is it possible to see the soul in your own eyes if they are its mirror image?– Indeed, a person’s eyes are the mirror of the soul. It is impossible to “hide” them and hide the radiant or even unmanifested light in them for those who want and can see.
How to reveal your greatness and transform your own imperfections?– This is a long path, but one that can be overcome by each of us in due time. There are major signs along the way. The first is to discover your own self-awareness. The second is to explore love and wisdom in the concrete realities of life in relation to oneself and the environment. Perhaps opened by me Laws of Love They will be the pointers that will make the journey shorter and the journey more enjoyable.
What kind of mirrors are other people for us - our loved ones, loved ones, friends and strangers?- Different facets and catalysts of what needs to be changed and transformed in oneself on the one hand and what can be avoided or avoided on the other. There are no uniform criteria here, except those that fit into the concept of serving oneself and people and distortion, which are inherent to everyone without exception. Especially it concerns distortions of love.
Do our shortcomings serve as a stumbling block in self-knowledge?– Only in the case when we ignore their presence and do not use them as a foundation for a transformative superstructure.
Can love transform imperfections into individual diversity?- Without a doubt. And she does this every moment of our lives, whether we notice it or not. Even while providing love resistance, we fall under her merciful Ray of Grace.
How to use the Law of the Mirror to understand your own looking glass?– To begin with, realize that we are all part of the Single Creative Principle, which has individual diversity, manifested as our higher “I” or Soul. And this Soul manifests itself as a unique individuality when we explore the world through our own light-emitting quality love, goodness, non-harm and free will.
Perhaps many questions may seem a bit heavy-handed to you, or you have your own view on their interpretation. This is normal and natural, because individual uniqueness once again emphasizes the beauty of the Divine Plan.
FINAL MILESTONES
“We are all multifaceted and multidimensional mirrors of each other, capable of reflecting both the dark sides of the personality and the bright faces of the soul.”
“Where can I find someone normal? - asked Alice.
“Nowhere,” answered the Cat, “there are no normal people.” After all, everyone is so different and dissimilar. And this, in my opinion, is normal.”
Lewis Carroll. "Alice in the Wonderland".
Our individual experience, despite its apparent isolation, is a mirror reflection of the processes occurring with many of us, albeit with its own shaded edging of our own canvas of life. And it certainly makes us less divided and more responsive.
And indeed, today more and more often we encounter in our lives a synchronous, mirror reflection of the thoughts, feelings, and sensations of other people vibrating in unison with us.
Although, perhaps, someone else lives in fear, and for others the promised transformations and bodily transformations seem too unrealistic. But what many of you will agree with me on is that we have certainly changed, becoming more responsive, sensitive, thinking.
And at the same time, we still have the same truly human needs for love, trust, acceptance, forgiveness, gratitude, which we are happy to share with those who are ready not only to hear us, but also to mirror something elusive and not fully realized, namely the sensation called the presence of light.
Each of us, sooner or later, learns a lesson in our lives called trust or self-belief. I believe, that means I know. If I don't know myself, how can I recognize and mirror another person?
Namely, it is in such ups and downs and conflicts that the essence of our nature is revealed. When we gain faith in ourselves, then we find in other people, life partners, a feeling of the same quality/quality/resonance. For no one has canceled the Law of the Mirror or Reflection.
And I want to end this article with the words of Alice, Lewis Carroll: “Don’t be sad. Sooner or later everything will become clear, everything will fall into place and line up in a single beautiful pattern, like lace. It will become clear why everything was needed, because everything will be right.” published
A prerequisite for the development of the “man-mirror” episteme in philosophy is the creation of the image of the “mirror” in the mythological consciousness of many peoples, in which the mirror served as a micromodel of the Universe, a principle of life, embodied in various signs, beliefs and fortune-telling, a prototype of the philosophical concept of “emptiness”, an attribute deities and characteristics of man, his soul and spirit. Thus, in the Buddhist tradition, a person’s heart, personifying his spirit, was understood as a pure mirror, the body as its stand, and in the mythology of the inhabitants of the island of Fiji, a person’s “bright soul” was considered as a reflection in water and a mirror.
In ancient Greek mythology, there was a myth about Narcissus. Its plot is simple. The nymph Echo fell in love with a beautiful young man, but he rejected her love, like many other nymphs, for which the goddess Aphrodite punished him. One day Narcissus wanted to drink water in a stream with clean and clear water and suddenly saw his image. “He looks in amazement at his reflection in the water, and strong love takes possession of him. With eyes full of love he looks at his image in the water, he beckons him, calls him, stretches out his hands to him. Narcissus leans towards the mirror of the waters to kiss the reflection, but kisses only the cold, clear water of the stream.” Narcissus stopped eating and drinking and kept admiring his image, until one day a terrible thought came to him: “Oh, woe! I'm afraid I've fallen in love with myself! After all, you are me! I love myself." And so Narcissus died, unable to tear himself away from his reflection. “From that moment,” writes E.K. Krasnukhina, “as Narcissus recognizes himself in the mirror of water, his sign, image, idea turns from an ideal into a materialized copy. This way the distance between reality and its reflection, designation is abolished. There is a reunification of what should remain divided. ...Now two images are reflected in each other and it is impossible to distinguish between reality and its sign.” There is a semiotization of reality and the materialization of the mirror image.
L.V. Starodubtseva identifies two interpretations of the myth of Narcissus. One (from Ovid to Freud and twentieth-century philosophers) views Narcissus as a narcissistic youth, mesmerized by his own reflection. Another (in Gnosticism and Christian mysticism) characterizes Narcissus as a sage who knew himself. She calls the first interpretation a look “at” oneself, for Narcissus loves “appearance,” shadow, illusion, reflection. The second - with a look “through”, representing a look “inside” himself: “Narcissus sees in his reflection that genuine “immortal” being, in relation to which he himself is just an “appearance”, a mortal man.” In remembrance of Tiresias's prediction to Narcissus's parents that their child would live to old age, "if he never sees his face", she sees a sociocultural ban on self-knowledge and punishment, which testifies to three ways of self-knowledge: Hellenic (reward of death), biblical (reward of faith) and ancient Indian (reward of enlightenment and nirvana). It seems to us that both interpretations of the myth of Narcissus as a narcissistic and self-knowing person are acceptable, for narcissism can be explained as a splitting of the Self into the real Self and the reflected Self, either in an objectified or in an ideal form.
The idea of narcissism was also developed in Russian folklore. For example, proverbs recognize the possibility of narcissism: “Everyone is dearer to himself,” “Everyone is a sight for sore eyes,” “Every toad praises himself,” “Everyone has his own thinness,” “I won’t laugh at someone else’s hump, I won’t look at my own hump enough.” ”, “No one will say a bad thing about themselves”, “One’s own is cute, even if it’s rotten”, “One’s own eye is a diamond, someone else’s is a piece of glass”, “One’s own eye is better than someone else’s”, “All beavers are equal, I’m the only sable”.
In folklore, vanity, arrogance and boasting are condemned in every possible way and the discrepancy between the real qualities of a person and his claims is emphasized: “The blister (bubble) swelled up and burst,” “A crow in peacock feathers,” “If you spit above your nose, you’ll spit on yourself,” “Not a penny.” stands, but looks like a ruble”, “The pig got to look at the sky”, “He became arrogant that the louse is scabbed”, “And the lady is great, but don’t go into the altar”, “No matter how the frog pouts, it’s far from the ox”, “Where a horse with a hoof, and a crab with a claw,” “For a penny of ammunition, but for a ruble of ambition,” “Don’t sulk, little cow, don’t be a bull,” “Don’t raise your nose, you’ll stumble,” “Don’t laugh, kvass, no better than us “,” “Don’t boast yourself, but wait for people to praise”, “No matter how much a duck cheers up, it won’t be a goose”, “There is no such thing as smart arrogance”, “The radish boasted: I’m good with honey”, “Sings well - where “He’ll sit down.” And, conversely, patience, modesty, and self-criticism are assessed positively.
In the Bible, the image of “mirror” is used in different meanings. For example, in the New Testament, in the letter of the Apostle James, a person who does not fulfill the word of God is “like a man examining the natural features of his face in a mirror” [Post. James 1:23]. Here the possibility of distortion of a person’s appearance in the mirror is emphasized. On the contrary, in the letter of the Apostle Paul, a person’s face is likened to a mirror on which the image of God is imprinted: “But we all, with open face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” .
In Orthodoxy, the mirrors for a person were the Bible, the writings of the church fathers, icons and prayers of a person. So John Larch wrote: “Prayer... is... a mirror of spiritual growth,” and the Archangel Gabriel was depicted on icons “with a lantern, inside of which a candle burns, in his right hand and with a jasper mirror in his left (symbols of the destinies of God hidden until the time of fulfillment, which are comprehended by those who look into the mirror of the word of God and their conscience.”
The idea of a mirror image as a double of the real “I” passed into philosophy, where the concepts of “mirror reflection”, “reflection”, “image”, “similarity” began to be widely used. In philosophical teachings before modern times, the episteme “man-mirror” contains many analogies: the similarity of man to an idea, God, nature, which are considered as true mirrors, is established. The term "mirror" was the name of various things with which man was related, and philosophers sought to identify the meanings of these similarities. Thus, in Plato, “eidos” are considered as models of things, and those as their similarities, mirror copies. Augustine, in one of the parts of the Confessions, retells the 1st letter of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians, where he argued that only in the face of God (“face to face”) does a person know, not in part, but “just as I am known.” But he retells it in a peculiar way, believing that when a person is away from God, then he is reflected in his soul mysteriously, incompletely, and thereby the person moves away from God: “We see, of course, “now there is something mysterious in the mirror,” and not “ face to face,” and therefore, while I wander away from You, I am closer to myself than to You.”
In medieval scholasticism, “nature was understood as a mirror in which man can contemplate the image of God.” N. Kuzansky, considering the mirror in its epistemological dimension, argued that God is “the immaculate, straightest, infinite and most perfect mirror of truth, and let all creations be concretely defined and variously curved mirrors.” If in knowledge the human mind turns to God, then “the mirror of truth, together with all the mirrors it has accepted into itself, will flow into a rational living mirror, and such a rational mirror will receive into itself the mirror ray of the mirror of truth, which carries within itself the truth of all mirrors.” Thus, the human mind was seen as a similarity to the divine mind. In Renaissance philosophy, Paracelsus interpreted the human soul as a mirror of the firmament.
The concept of “mirror” in the philosophy of modern times acquires both ontological and especially epistemological meaning, because epistemological issues become dominant in this period. Consciousness is viewed as a mirror, either adequately reflecting reality or distorted (Bacon's idols). G. Leibniz develops a general scientific methodology of identities and differences and applies it to the understanding of monads, building their classification according to spiritual and psychological characteristics - the originality of consciousness and the degree of its development. A person’s rational soul (monads-spirits) differs from other souls in that it is not only a mirror of the Universe, but also a reflection of the image of God.
G.W.F. Hegel compares philosophical reflection with light, “when in its rectilinear movement it meets a mirror surface and is thrown back by it. This comparison provides an understanding of the subject in its essence as a reflection into “its otherness.” In the second half of the 19th century. Other dimensions of the mirror phenomenon are also considered. L. Feuerbach highlights its anthropological meaning: turning N. Kuzansky’s formula about man as a mirror of God, he asserts that “God is the mirror of man”: “This mirror image (of a reflective person - I.S.), presented as another subject, there is an absolute personality." K. Marx used the image of a mirror to explain that a person can understand his Self only in his ideal existence in another person. “A person,” he believed, “first looks like in a mirror, into another person. Only by treating the man Paul as one like himself, does the man Peter begin to treat himself as a man.” In the philosophical anthropology of the twentieth century. This idea has been considered in many ways in the problematic of Self and Other.
In the 20th century Homo sapiens is replaced by a man who desires, and the episteme “man-mirror” finally displaces Cartesian self-consciousness (I). Z. Freud considers self-love and love for another as two alternatives and believes that self-love indicates the mental pathology of the individual and his inability to love others. “Consequently,” E. Fromm assessed Freud’s position, “love and self-love are mutually exclusive in the sense that the greater the first, the less the second. If loving yourself is bad, then it follows that not loving yourself is virtuous.”
Freud explored the problem of narcissism in his works “Towards a Theory of Sexual Desire” and “Introduction to Psychoanalysis.” The author of the term “narcissism” is the English scientist H. Ellis. Freud borrows this term from P. Necke and considers narcissism “a libidinal addition to the egoism of the instinct of self-preservation, a certain share of which is rightfully assumed in every living being.” In his opinion, there are two types of psychic energy - “I-libido” and “object-libido”. In childhood, the child is characterized by primary narcissism (autoeroticism), which is due to his “experiences associated with the satisfaction of the basic needs of the Self,” and is confirmed by the good attitude of gentle parents towards their children and the child’s choice of the mother or those caring for him as the first sexual objects . Later, the “object-libido” is separated from the “I-libido”, and the object-libido can return to the I. Freud confirmed these ideas by analyzing the phenomena of falling in love, illness, and sleep. He considers secondary narcissism in an adult to be a pathogenic process.
I-libido, in his opinion, is not completely spent on attachment to an object, but turns into the ideal “I”: “Narcissism turns out to be transferred to this ideal “I”, which, like the infantile one, possesses all valuable perfections.” This ideal of the Self turns out to be a compensation for “the lost narcissism of childhood, when he himself was his own ideal.” An individual is encouraged to form an ideal “I” by criticism from his parents, educators, others, and public opinion.
Thus, the development of the “I”, according to Freud, is associated with a departure from the primary narcissism of childhood through the transfer of libido to the ideal of the “I” (imposed by society or culture), as well as to objects. Falling in love turns an object into a sexual ideal, which enters into a relationship of mutual assistance with the I-ideal (if the “I” is not enough to achieve its ideal, then an object that has the missing qualities of the “I” comes to the rescue), thereby achieving satisfaction. The selection of an object is carried out in two ways: “Or by narcissistic type when the place of one’s own “I” is replaced by an object that is possibly more similar to it, or by type of support, when persons who have become dear due to the satisfaction of other vital needs are also chosen as objects of libido.”
With regard to the correlation between “I-libido” and egoism, Freud believes that an individual can be an egoist both with strong libidinal attachments to objects and with dominance "I-libido". If the individual is unable to transfer the “I-libido” to the object, he retains narcissistic identification and narcissistic diseases arise. The peculiarity of Freud's views is that he considered the problem of narcissism on the basis of the theory of libido.
N.A. Berdyaev evaluates Freud’s ideas from the position of his concept “I and you”, “we”. “It is known,” he believed, “that for Freud, the “I” makes libido its object. This is narcissism, which... poses a deep problem. Narcissism is a split, so the “I” becomes an object for itself, i.e. objectified. The “I” for itself belongs to the objectified world. Overcoming narcissism means that the “I” seeks reflection in another “I”, and not in itself. ... Freud’s deepest instinct of “I” is the instinct of death, because he does not know the secret of communication, the secret of the exit of “I” into “you” and into “we”.
Fromm, on the contrary, believed that self-love and love for others are not mutually exclusive, which is confirmed by the biblical commandment “love your neighbor as yourself” and the indivisibility of the feeling of love between “I” and others: “If an individual is able to love creatively, he loves himself too; if he loves only others, he cannot love at all.” Fromm believed that it was erroneous to identify the concepts of “self-love” and “egoism,” since the desire of an egoistic person to “snatch more pleasure from life” indicates that he loves himself “too weakly” and is “empty and frustrated.” He views the excessive care of an unselfish mother towards her child as evidence that “she is forced to compensate for her lack of ability to love him at all.” Thus, the philosophy of the twentieth century. when considering the episteme “man-mirror”, she focused attention on human existence, on the I of the individual person, the duality of his inner world and the painful search for establishing individual self-identity by correlating the I of the individual person and the ideal other being of the I in the Other or the I and his alter ego in the soul human individual.
In the myth of Narcissus and in many philosophical teachings about narcissism, we speak exclusively of male selfishness. An explanation of the determination of narcissism by the constitution of gender can be found in V.I. Krasikov, who considered the instinct of self-preservation to be the basic feeling of a woman, while narcissism only accompanies it, and self-love is an attributable property of a man as compensation for his temporary role in the biological reproduction of the species, a kind of “male anthropological rebellion” aimed at protecting the uniqueness of one’s existence. This male narcissism has the peculiarity that a man loves himself in his incarnations - material and spiritual. “That’s why the main difference between male self-love, which is artificial in its basis,” writes Krasikov, “from the naturalness of the instinct of self-preservation is that it is always directed outward. In other words, a man does not love himself, but rather his incarnations, the embodiments of his activity, his spirit, his uniqueness. He loves not himself, as he really is, but rather his significant self, himself who has passed certification in external things, i.e. resulting (even if ideal) traces. Moreover, “outside” always means objectification - bodily, material or spiritual. ...Men's "love", if it exists and is distinguishable simply from the urge to copulate, is love for your trace, trace of yourself in another person» .
Self-love can manifest itself in gestures, values, self-esteem, motives, behavior, and love for one’s body can manifest itself in the form of admiring oneself in the mirror or in assessments of it by Other(s). The question is, why in a mirror and not in window glass, water or a photograph? After all, there is a sign of repetition and duplication in them too. E.K. Krasnukhina explains this by saying that “there are two optics, two types of vision”: through window glass a person sees objects belonging to the “sphere of non-I,” and through mirror glass an image that “can no longer be unambiguously attributed to to the external world of non-I,” his second Self, which indicates a split in the Self and gives rise to the problem of the relationship between the Self as the original and the Self as a copy. The essence of mirror reflection is that it shows a person his image through the prism of his desires, assessments, and values. Therefore, I, as an Other, located in the mirror, plays the role of a bearer of certain meanings. These meanings are individual, they belong to me, but nevertheless they have been influenced by the values that exist in society and culture, as a result of which they are at the same time intersubjective.
Does this mean that a person always sees himself in the mirror? No, he may not recognize himself, not recognize himself, consider his mirror image not as Another Self, but as a Stranger. The mirror form of the other being of the Self enters into a variety of relationships with the real Self. F. Nietzsche writes about this, discussing Zarathustra’s dream, in which he dreamed of a child who brought him a mirror: “O Zarathustra,” the child said to me, “look at yourself in the mirror!” Looking in the mirror, I screamed, and my heart shuddered: for I did not see myself in it, but the face of the devil and his caustic smile.” For Zarathustra, the difference between his Self in the mirror and the Self actually had the symbolic meaning of a distortion of his teaching; his mirror Self turned out to be the bearer of meanings that did not belong to him. Thus, in the mirror reflection there is an alienation of my alter ego from the Self.
R. Burns, based on the concept of symbolic interactionism of Cooley and Mead, distinguished three types of Self in his self-concept: the real Self, the mirror Self (ideal ideas about the individual of significant others) and the ideal Self (the individual’s attitudes about significant others and how he is would like to be). If these images coincide, then the individual’s self-esteem will be high, and he will develop a positive self-concept. If these images do not match, the individual’s self-esteem will be low, and he will develop a negative self-concept. Thus, an individual’s self-identification depends not only on his desires, but also on his assessment by the Other and Others.
The episteme “man-mirror” is also widespread in fiction, for example, in the fairy tales of A.S. Pushkin, the semi-mystical works of F. Kafka, the poetry of S. Yesenin, the stories and novels of F. M. Dostoevsky, O. Wilde and O. De Balzac, etc. One of those writers who was inspired by the myth of Narcissus was Wilde, who created the novel “The Picture of Dorian Gray” about a beautiful young man who fell in love with his portrait and wished that in the future he would grow old, and he would remain young. His hero initially believed that “the portrait would become a magic mirror for him,” reflecting first his face and then his soul. Every morning he stood in front of his portrait, admiring it, and even, like Narcissus, kissed the lips painted on the portrait. But as he began to lead the life of a libertine, a drug addict, and then a murderer, he began to fear his portrait, because all his crimes were imprinted on it.
The idea of a double is repeated several times in the novel. Gray’s double is his portrait, as well as the main character of Huysmans’s book “On the contrary,” the Duke of Des Esseintes, fleeing from reality into a world of pleasures. Gray read this book about a famous hedonist who, losing his beauty, was afraid of mirrors, and saw his prototype in him. His double is Lord Henry, who conveys his cynical way of thinking to Gray. The mystical connection between the portrait and the hero becomes unbearable for him, and he seeks to break it, first in symbolic form, breaking the mirror, which, as if in mockery, reminds him of his unfading beauty, and then practically - he destroys his double in the portrait, and in fact, himself. The modern Narcissus ends his life tragically, just like his mythological prototype. Beauty, not combined with morality, turns out to be destructive for a person, which leads the author to philosophical reflections on the relationship between soul and body. “Soul and body,” Wilde admits, “body and soul – what a mystery it is. ...Is the human soul really just a shadow, enclosed in a sinful shell? Or, as Giordano Bruno believed, is the body contained in the spirit? The separation of the soul from the body is as incomprehensible a mystery as their merging.” During the period of perestroika in Russia in the 80s. Wilde's idea of the double portrait was used to depict a portrait of the bureaucracy.
The idea of Narcissus, the narcissist, is also embodied in Pushkin’s “The Tale of the Dead Princess and the Seven Knights,” in which the queen-stepmother is “proud, brittle, capricious and jealous” and demands from her magic mirror that it always certify her beauty: “You, queen, cutest of all, blushing and whiter of all.” On the day when the mirror replied that “the princess is the sweetest of all, the most rosy and white of all,” the stepmother refuses to believe the mirror: “Oh, you vile glass! “You’re lying to spite me,” and decides to harass his stepdaughter. After the latter's groom saves his bride and brings her to the palace, the stepmother, having learned from the mirror that the princess is still alive and the most beautiful of all, breaks the mirror out of anger and, having lost her magical assistant, loses the possibility of her self-identification and dies of melancholy . The fairy tale contains a hint to a narcissistic person: do not consider yourself perfect and do not trust your mirror image.
In addition to the narcissist, in philosophy and literary texts there is also a self-knowing Narcissus. But, if philosophy emphasizes that Narcissus seeks to know the truth in himself, forgetting himself, or sees a memory of himself, so that his relationship with his mirror image takes the form of “mnemonic mirroring” of meanings, then in fiction, especially in Russian, the meaning of self-knowledge is the discovery of the antinomy of the soul and spirit of the Russian person, their bifurcation, as N.A. Berdyaev wrote, into apocalypticism and nihilism: “The antinomic polarity of the Russian soul combines nihilism with religious aspiration towards the end of the world, towards a new revelation, a new earth and a new sky.”
The plot of Yesenin’s poem “The Black Man” is as follows: the poet sees at night, either in a dream or in reality, a black man who tells him about his life as the life of an adventurer, a brawler, “a scoundrel and a drunkard.” Unable to withstand such negative assessments, the poet hits the black man with a cane, and, upon waking up, discovers the following picture: “I’m standing in a top hat, No one is with me. I’m alone... And a broken mirror...". The mirror in Yesenin’s poem reflected those bad desires and base passions that were in the poet’s soul, and what he saw shocked the poet, who admitted: “I am very, very sick.”
In one of the chapters of Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov,” which is called “Damn. The Nightmare of Ivan Fedorovich" tells about a dream or delirium, a hallucination of Ivan Karamazov. It is known that hallucination represents a false perception of non-existent objects that seem to exist in reality to a person. Delirium represents the meeting and conversation of the hero with the devil. In this conversation, Karamazov strives to identify the devil, believing that he really does not exist: “No, you are not on your own, you are me, you are me and nothing more! You're trash, you're my fantasy." It turns out that this is Karamazov’s sick fantasy, because he is a nihilist, an atheist, and does not believe in God or the devil. The devil wittily defends himself by citing Descartes’ famous thesis: “I think, therefore I exist.” They say that since he, damn it, philosophizes, that means he exists.
Further, it turns out that the question of identifying the devil is connected with the identification of God. The devil points out to Karamazov what has always tormented him, namely, the connection between atheism and the decline of morality, permissiveness. In a conversation with Alyosha, who woke up Karamazov, he again recalls his night conversation with the devil and admits: “And he is me, Alyosha, myself. Everything of mine is base, everything of mine is vile and despicable. ...He, however, told me a lot of truth about me. I would never tell myself that. ...I would really like it to really exist He, not me". It turns out that it was the devil who told Karamazov that he was guilty of killing his father, for Smerdyakov killed Fyodor Karamazov because the ideas of nihilism and moral relativism, which Ivan taught to Smerdyakov, were the main motives that pushed him to murder. The devil turned out to be Karamazov's second self, evil, dark, destructive, his mirror image, in which he was forced to recognize himself.
The idea of a double was embodied in R. Stevenson’s novel “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mister Hyde” and in F. M. Dostoevsky’s science fiction story “The Double.” In the first, two opposing spiritual selves are contained in one person, alternately revealing themselves to others, and in the second, the spiritual and physical selves of the hero are objectified in his bodily double, who has a completely different self. Dostoevsky portrays, like the official Golyadkin, a timid man, with glimpses of a sense of personal dignity, his double Golyadkin Jr. appears, to whom he, according to N.A. Dobrolyubov, conveyed “everything mean and worldly clever, everything nasty and successful that comes into his imagination,” thanks to which the latter drives the hero to madness.
M.M. Bakhtin noted that, unlike Gogol, who created “a solid social and characterological image of the hero,” in Dostoevsky, the hero’s features become “the subject of his painful self-awareness; Even the very appearance of the “poor official” that Gogol portrayed, Dostoevsky forces the hero to contemplate in the mirror.” Indeed, the hero of Dostoevsky’s novel “Poor People,” Makar Devushkin, heading to the general, sees himself in the mirror: “I was so taken aback that my lips were shaking and my legs were shaking. Yes, and there was a reason, little mother. Firstly, conscientiously; I looked to the right in the mirror, it was so easy to go crazy from what I saw there. My button... suddenly fell off... rolled, and right, damn it, at the feet of His Excellency... His Excellency immediately drew attention to my figure and my suit. I remembered what I saw in the mirror: I rushed to catch the button. Devushkin saw himself in the mirror as if from the outside: pitiful, in an old shabby suit, with a torn button, leaky boots, shaking with fear of the general. He felt terribly ashamed of his unsightly appearance, his obvious poverty, and, moreover, the damage to the document he had copied. “I, my little angel,” he writes to Varvara Alekseevna, “was burning, I was burning in hellish fire! I was dying."
In Dostoevsky’s Notes from Underground, the role of a mirror is played by Golyadkin’s Double, his alter ego, objectified in the form of his “notes,” or diary, in which he criticizes the ideology of the Enlightenment, especially its ethical theory of reasonable egoism, the revolutionary democratic program of N.G. Chernyshevsky, the teachings of Western socialists about social progress, an enlightened, reasonable and happy society. To this entire system of ideas, Golyadkin contrasts real, as he believes, people, with their desire for care and at the same time, with bad self-will, moral corruption, mental poverty, individualism, sadomasochism, desires directed against their own benefit and the demands of reason and reason. “Man,” assures Dostoevsky’s anti-hero, “always and everywhere, no matter who he was, loved to act as he wanted, and not at all as reason and benefit commanded him; ...Your own, free and free will, your own, even the wildest whim, your own fantasy, sometimes irritated even to the point of madness - this is all that same, missed, most profitable benefit, which under no circumstances classification is not suitable and from which all systems and theories constantly fly to hell.”
A person, according to Golyadkin, does not want to be an “organ pin” whose desires can be calculated from a tablet, and whose life can be calculated in advance according to the laws of science; he is a reckless creature, does not listen to the voice of reason, is unpredictable, loves to “show off” and act contrary to the expectations of other people. Bringing, of course, the valuable idea of a freely choosing person to the point of absurdity, Dostoevsky’s hero assures that human nature does not obey the laws of reason and is capable of the most unbridled forms of willful thinking and behavior. Homo sapiens, as the pride of all classical philosophy and culture, is replaced by Dostoevsky by an absurd man (whose character is close to the character of man created by A. Camus), opposed to the man-cog, living according to the laws of the collective and the state. The revolt against totalitarianism turns into an apologetics of chaos and anarchy. Dostoevsky puts a person before a choice, but both of these choices humiliate human dignity. Golyadkin himself admits this, assuring that in his reasoning he goes to the extreme, so that both versions of the type of person cannot have the form of “omnipotence.” Thus, the mirror reflection of the Self of Dostoevsky’s hero showed him as a person outside of society and culture, who saw the terrible traits of man and fatalistically denied the possibility of creating a spiritual and moral person.
In “Shagreen Skin” by Balzac, the magical shagreen skin of the biblical animal donkey-onager serves as a kind of mirror for the hero: it fulfills his wishes and at the same time shortens his life, symbolized by the reduction in its volume. Thus, shagreen skin reflects the desires of a person, his Self. It is not without reason that one of the names of onager skin is shagri, which means stream. The hero of the novel, a young man, Raphael Valentin, lives a miserable life, then turns into a gambler, sometimes winning wealth, sometimes losing everything, falls madly in love and loses his love due to poverty. At this time, he becomes the owner of shagreen skin, a kind of testament of Solomon, which fulfills all his desires. He becomes rich and famous, but his shagreen skin inexorably shrinks. In search of ways to expand it, he successively turns to a zoologist, a mechanic, a chemist, and doctors. But the first provided him with a classification of the genus of donkeys, the second tried to flatten the shagreen skin with a machine and then stretch it in a forge, the third hoped to expand it by applying salts, alkalis, gases and electric current, and the latter could not explain the connection between Raphael's disease and shagreen skin . Some considered her the creation of God, others - the devil. Rafael dies while fulfilling his last wish - love passion for his wife. The writer showed that desires are objectified in things, but in the pursuit of them a person loses the true meaning of his life.
Analysis of the episteme “man-mirror” through its existence in culture allows us to consider the splitting of the Self into Self-Self and Self-Other as the coexistence of competing identities within one personality. The relationship between them can be harmonious and disharmonious, which depends not only on society and its culture, which “supply” cultural models of the Self, but also on the priority values of the individual himself.
Various philosophical teachings and works of art about the “mirror man” indicate that mirror reflection exists in objectified and subjectified forms. The narcissist is accessible to others, is identified by them in this capacity and can count on their help. The self-knowing narcissist is inaccessible to anyone except himself, the split of his soul is hidden in the depths of his Self, and he can only gain the integrity of his Self and his being personally, by defeating one of his Selves or establishing a balance between them. The Augustinian version of Christianity adheres to the point of view that only God as the creator of man and the only positive basis of his existence can be the mirror of man. Russian Christian philosophy of the twentieth century. in fact, he pursues the idea of two-mirrority: “God in man, man in God due to the fact that they are inseparably unmerged moments of God-humanity.”
The episteme of “man-mirror” in the forms Narcissus, mirror Self, reflected Self, Double was widespread in the history of culture. “Narcissus,” writes Starodubtseva, “was loved by painters and sculptors. ...But still, conceptual interpretations were more fortunate than pictorial-plastic ones. And there were many of them - philosophical, poetic, psychological, religious and mystical. Some were attracted to the motif in the myth of Narcissus doublings, twins And doubles. Others - motive reflections And mirrors, mutual illumination of illusory and genuine reality, image and prototype. Still others were looking for a manifestation of the eternal theme here "self-knowledge" and saw in Narcissus a hint of a game "I" And "not me". The fourth were interested in the problem of self-identification in the myth... Of course, there was no shortage of psychoanalytic concepts of unsatisfied passion.”
The various meanings of the image of Narcissus testify to the conceptual richness of the “mirror man” episteme. Starodubtseva correctly emphasizes that the dominance of the image of the narcissist in the public consciousness of the period of super-industrial civilization can be considered as an accusation against the latter and its mass culture, for they created the anthropological type of an egoist, a consumer person thirsting for pleasure and entertainment and possessing a happy consciousness from receiving immeasurable pleasure from endless consumption. A person discovers these projections of social consciousness in his mirror image.
In philosophy and fiction, two scenarios have been realized, two interpretations of Narcissus as a narcissistic and self-knowing person with the same tragic ending. Mirror optics, whether a person looks into the mirror of water, the Other or his own soul, reveals a strange property of subjectivization of the reflection of a person, which F. Bacon called idols. The episteme “man-mirror” testifies to the existence of idols of the human Self, understood not only in the sense of a person’s delusions about himself, but also in the sense of a person creating an idol from the Other Self.
“Man, as if in a mirror, the world has many faces.
He is insignificant - and he is immeasurably great! – Omar Khayyam.
These lines of the famous Persian poet are more relevant than ever in this difficult and fateful time for our world.
What do we demonstrate - the imperfection of a limited and ignorant personality or the maturity and humanistic orientation of a developed individuality under the shadow of a bright soul?
The mirror of personality and the looking glass of the soul, by analogy with the famous character Alice from Through the Looking Glass, often create a point of friction - an internal conflict that is a catalyst for our relationship with ourselves and the world.
The duality of the soul and personality is the field of individual experience of each person in which he manifests his best or worst qualities through serving himself/people, bringing light/love or serving himself through the manipulation of other people.
THEORY AND LAW OF MIRROR
“Why do you always say: “Don’t bury”? - Alice finally asked with annoyance. -What am I burying? And where? –– You buried your mind! And I don’t know where!” – Lewis Carroll." Alice in the Wonderland.
Charles' theory Coolie– theory of the social mirror or “mirror of personality”comes down to the fact that when comparing oneself with others, a person develops his own opinion from the assessments of other people. Formation of assessment is associated with reward. Actions that are encouraged in a person can be further developed:
We analyze how people treat us.
We analyze how we feel about this assessment.
We analyze how we respond to this assessment.
Sociologist Charles Cooley used the concept of the “mirror of personality,” putting forward the idea that an individual’s self-awareness reflects the assessments and opinions of the people with whom he interacts.
This idea was later taken up by George Herbert Mead and Harry Stack Sullivan. Mead believed that a person's self-awareness is the result of his social interactions, during which he learns to look at himself as if from the outside, as an object. Moreover, the decisive importance for self-awareness is not the opinion of individual people, but of the “generalized other” - the collective attitude of an organized community or social group.
No less significant are the qualities, like mirrors reflecting passion, tenderness, the need for acceptance, understanding, approval, support, based essentially on mutual interest. This is how falling in love and infatuation create mutual attraction and desired rapprochement.
This ideal manifestation of love occurs when the imperfection of the individual recedes into the background along with ambition, ambition, vanity, pride, eternal dissatisfaction and regret. For love does not oppose anything, does not claim anything, and does not desire to possess. She simply gives the benefit of participation and co-creation along with merciful (sweet to the heart) acceptance.
IMPERFECTION OF PERSONALITY
Personality is a field of human experience, including the unconscious and subconscious levels and a close connection with the emotional and mental bodies of a person, which in turn influence the etheric and dense physical bodies.
The imperfection of the personality, uncontrolled and not centered in the soul, has its distinctive features:
desire for dominance and manipulation
pride/feeling of being “chosen”/superiority over others
ambition
egoism/egocentrism
feeling of disunity/separateness/lack of unity/love for the whole.
That is, we all have the qualities of an imperfect personality, albeit in different proportions. Therefore, it is not always easy not to use personal egocentric tools, especially when they are “always at hand.”
But there is one interesting BUT. And this “but” is that when a person “gets tired” of the swing of pleasure/displeasure, which is largely an automatic reaction of the collective consciousness multiplied by his own childhood complexes and limitations, he becomes more and more individualized, latently reacting to spiritual impulses.
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUALITY
Harmony is an essential quality of the soul and its mirror, manifested reflection - personality. - Author.
Personality, etymologically, from the point of view of Duetics, is devoid of a clear direction for conscious creation. She appears as love exploring part of the new body consciousness. That is, personality is a field of human experience, limited by external and internal instruments of perception and the lack of a holistic picture of one’s own sense of self, characteristic of many incarnations of the soul.
In Duetik, individuality is seen as manifestation of the soul through a personal vehicle. Etymologically, individuality represents a person as a unique seeker of new roads of interest, inspired by the exploration of duality. I mean, individuality is the Soul manifesting itself as the duality of “I” and “not-me” or dynamic interest arising in the individual according to dual creation.
Individual development contains a consistent program for the development of the soul, which involves three phases, as can be seen in the figure:
In other words, when other people's mirrors do not produce the desired change, the person begins to turn his attention more and more to his own mirror in an attempt to look through the looking glass.
And then, as if by magic, the realization comes that attention should be directed not to the external, because it is often distorted, but to the reflection of the internal in the external. Because this is how our value perception of the world is formed. Everything must be passed through oneself, like a feeling-knowing sponge or sieve. Only our higher “I” is the measure of all things.
DIALOGUES OF THE SOUL AND PERSONALITY
« Our life is a certain series of dialogues in which we learn about ourselves and the world through the reflection of other people.”- Author.
Soul and personality, spiritual development and personal growth mirror the nature of man through his empirical or sensory knowledge of the world and himself, along with rational and logical comparison and commensuration.
Dialogues of the soul and personality are dialogues between “I” and not-I, the feeling-knowledge of the soul and the experienced knowledge of the personality. 
These dialogues are not similar to ordinary communication, because representative channels or sense organs do not always work like a harmonious orchestra. That is, it is quite difficult to imagine that you, as an individual, being an imperfect being, hide within yourself a perfect divine principle.
It is much easier to recognize the soul, because the very word soul is heard by everyone, although the meaning is attached to it due to one’s own limited understanding.
It is much more difficult to conduct a dialogue with your own soul, receiving feedback. After all, sometimes the path to the looking glass of the soul is not close. The path of trial, error and delusion.
Whatever, we don’t care about mistakes. But It is not the one who does not make mistakes who acts wisely, but the one who, having made them, realizes them.
“An error is in reality a half-truth that stumbles due to its limitations; often it is the Truth that puts on masks in order to quietly approach its goal.” – Sri Aurobindo. Life Divine.
If we listen carefully to ourselves, then one day we will be able to hear someone or something whispering to us all the time:
Go and rush
Love and enjoy
Suffer and be surprised
Search and make mistakes...
This is the silent voice of our soul. For some it may seem frightening, but for others it brings them out of hibernation. No matter how we perceive our voice of silence, it is our best guide to discovering who is sounding that note.
“DISCOVERING” THE SOUL
You can discover your own soul both through self-knowledge and through the reflection of your soul in another person through LOVE.- Author.
Is it possible to see the soul in your own eyes if they are its mirror image?– Indeed, a person’s eyes are the mirror of the soul. It is impossible to “hide” them and hide the radiant or even unmanifested light in them for those who want and can see.
How to reveal your greatness and transform your own imperfections?– This is a long path, but one that can be overcome by each of us in due time. There are major signs along the way. The first is to discover your own self-awareness. The second is to explore love and wisdom in the concrete realities of life in relation to oneself and the environment. Perhaps opened by meThey will be the pointers that will make the journey shorter and the journey more enjoyable.
What kind of mirrors are other people for us - our loved ones, loved ones, friends and strangers?– Different facets and catalysts of what is worth changing and transforming in yourself on the one hand and what can be avoided or avoided on the other. There are no uniform criteria here, except those that fit into the concept of serving oneself and people and , which are inherent to everyone without exception. Especially it concerns
Do our shortcomings serve as a stumbling block in self-knowledge?– Only in the case when we ignore their presence and do not use them as a foundation for a transformative superstructure.
Can love transform imperfections into individual diversity?- Without a doubt. And she does this every moment of our lives, whether we notice it or not. Even while providing, we fall under her merciful Ray .
How to use the Law of the Mirror to understand your own looking glass?– To begin with, realize that we are all part of the Single Creative Principle, which has individual diversity, manifested as our higher “I” or Soul. And this Soul manifests itself as a unique individuality when we explore the world through our own light-emitting quality
Perhaps manymay seem a bit heavy-handed to you, or you have your own view on their interpretation. This is normal and natural, because individual uniqueness once again emphasizes the beauty of the Divine Plan.
FINAL MILESTONES
“We are all multifaceted and multidimensional mirrors of each other, capable of reflecting both the dark sides of the personality and the bright faces of the soul.”- Author.
“Where can I find someone normal? - asked Alice. “Nowhere,” answered the Cat, “there are no normal people.” After all, everyone is so different and dissimilar. And this, in my opinion, is normal.” – Lewis Carroll. Alice in the Wonderland.
Our individual experience, despite its apparent isolation, is a mirror reflection of the processes occurring with many of us, albeit with its own shaded edging of our own canvas of life. And it certainly makes us less divided and more responsive.
And indeed, today more and more often we encounter in our lives a synchronous, mirror reflection of the thoughts, feelings, and sensations of other people vibrating in unison with us.
Although, perhaps, someone else lives in fear, and for others the promised transformations and bodily transformations seem too unrealistic. But what many of you will agree with me on is that we have certainly changed, becoming more responsive, sensitive, thinking.
And at the same time, we still have the same truly human needs for love, trust, acceptance, forgiveness, gratitude, which we are happy to share with those who are ready not only to hear us, but also to mirror something elusive and not fully realized, namely the sensation called the presence of light.
Each of us, sooner or later, learns a lesson in our lives called trust or self-belief. I believe, that means I know. If I don't know myself, how can I recognize and mirror another person?
Namely, it is in such ups and downs and conflicts that the essence of our nature is revealed. When we gain faith in ourselves, then we find in other people, life partners, a feeling of the same quality/quality/resonance. For no one has canceled the Law of the Mirror or Reflection.
And I want to end this article with the words of Alice, Lewis Carroll: “Don’t be sad. Sooner or later everything will become clear, everything will fall into place and line up in a single beautiful pattern, like lace. It will become clear why everything was needed, because everything will be right.”
Use of this article is permitted with a mandatory indexed hyperlink to the author and website :
Related materials:
Loading...