I read them like: Just do it! Wouldn’t doing it be great! C’mon, dust yourself off - You can do it!
1 Like
@claudiu I think William has a great chance.
@JonnyPitt There certainly needs to be an improvement to how the actualism method is adapted to each individual.
Or, better said, i have to adapt the method in a way it works. As you are doing with the current time awareness focus.
It may not seem so, but this forum format is really helpful to me.
Having a thread i can vent in, whilst still being in the mix of actually improving my life, is gold.
Today’s tears were very overdue.
1 Like
I’m quite surprised the AFT uses that phrase. There is no other time than now so how can current time awareness be anything other than a delusion: Is there such a thing as past-time awareness? It’s only now. It’s always been now. So being fascinated with that is definitely not current time awareness. Yet Richard and Vineeto both use that phrase. I don’t get it.
I think they initially used a lot of generic phrases like that, then went away from them because people took them to be saying the same things as newage mindfulness etc.
Even the word “now” is famously “owned” by ekhart Toll (spelling)
As the difference between being “some old guy with undisturbed poetic ability to fuck up, and otherwise write about it forever” and being “happy and harmless, naive, likable and liking, etc., enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive” is indeed ultimately just a choice, then yes, anyone can certainly “Just do it!” 
It really is that simple. And you can obviously see it is that simple when being naive. So the task for you is how to rekindle this naivete that you apparently have lost touch with - else why react the way you did to me being naive?
For my part I always interpreted the emphasis/subject of the sentence to be the awareness: to be aware of/about the current time.
So while there is no
such a thing as past-time awareness
(except interpreted as an event that happened in the past) now one indeed can be unaware of the now.
1 Like
@Andrew it is really startling to me the enormity of the trauma that you have experienced. I don’t know you very well, but it does seem like despite this you’ve managed better than others who may have had a similar experience. In what way would you say actualism helped with that?
I am more circumspect these days about interfering with peoples own processes towards actual freedom. Everyone is different and someone who has experienced profound trauma in life at an early age may perhaps need tao take a different route to others who have had no such experience. Potentially one might need to build ones ‘self’ up and demarcate it before eradicating it.
Maybe there does need to be a process of mourning, of taking stock. I don’t really know. I know I did a fair bit of this myself as a feeling being and yet I experienced nothing near the level of hardship that you did. At some point when the time was ripe and I found that I had to dry my tears, stop getting enthralled in the drama of feeling and go once more into purity, seeing/feeling myself as a total being warts and all, neither sentimentalising it nor dismissing it. This wasn’t necessarily a ‘one and done’ thing though, I often went back and forth between purity and being deeply enthralled by the feeling being that I was, until of course at some point I stayed permanently with purity.
2 Likes
I think “I” have played this type of linguistic/philosophical games long enough, so… OK
The distinctions are made so you and me and anyone else doesn’t confuse being fascinated with a readily available and verifiable fact with a sustained effort to be more present aka living in the now or staying in the present or living in the moment. The keywords in the former are fascination and fact. The key difference is that with fascination there need not be a sustained effort. The fascination does all the work.
This does bring up the issue of obsession. To get to fascination one must become obsessed. Ime anyways and I think it’s in line with the AFT. Correct me if I’m wrong, please. To become obsessed, some sustained effort is required. Does that sustained effort differ in the sustained effort needed for living in the now? Yes it does. The former is the scientific verification of an empirical piece of data i.e. that it is indeed now. One obsesses over that verification process to get to fascination. In the latter, it’s all just effort to stay present, which divides the mind, because one can’t stay present all the time without disassociation. If i’m thinking about the past or future, I can’t stay present without disassociation. Correct me if I’m wrong. Otoh, if I have a general fascination that it’s always now then I can think of the past or future without any need to disassociate. Furthermore and very importantly, it has become pretty clear, due to the constant verification process, it’s already now so one realizes that feeling one way or another about a past event is silly (since it’s already now) or a possible future event (since it will be now.) Do you see why it’s not such a bad idea to make these distinctions?
1 Like
Thanks for the reply.
How has actualism helped?
Well, I can’t A/B test what the last decade would have been without being interested in actualism, so I can only factually say, i am still alive! Which, for my family, is an accomplishment.
There are key points / decisions which definitely would have been different, if i hadn’t known about actualism.
Leaving my ex wife. Although this sounds bad, leaving that marriage was a very positive thing. Hugely traumatic, but the outcome has been that I learnt a whole encyclopaedia of experience and information about how things are ‘really’ working.
Regarding building up a self, I agree with this.
I felt myself to be less than nothing, which actually had a lot of narcissistic compensation and highly co-dependent compensation built into me.
I survived in a weird twilight between being extremely egotistical, and pathetically dependent.
The choices i made over the last decade, were shaped by actualism, without being inspired by it. I wasn’t successful with actualism, but i still belonged to something. Still had something to make sense of things.
I think believing, in anything that offers some hope, is generally what keeps people alive. Or, at least me.
On the subject of people who have had little trauma in life, I actually can’t easily think of anyone I know!
Which leads to the question ; if the majority have had a traumatic life, then there is definitely something in between where they (all the other me’s) are, and being naive enough to succeed with actualism.
The data now is piling up. The success rate of actualism is very low.
As a veteran of 3 world religions, and actualism, i can say with some authority that it does actualism no favours to use the same reasoning that the other 3 do to justify their lack of success ; that is, people aren’t trying hard enough.
People are trying as hard as they can.
We know why the religions don’t work. They were never ‘designed’ to bring individual peace and happiness.
However, why isn’t actualism working? It is designed for this purpose.
Richard said he had never talked with someone like me. (The mix of extreme pentacostal Christianity, and whatever else made me who i am). I am not surprised.
The best they (Richard and Vineeto) was to tell me off. Richard put on a stern face and seemed agitated, told me off for quite a while. Vineeto even made a statement that i was a “mummy’s boy”. In the end, they gave me an ultimatum ; decide to feel good, or they would not see me again.
I don’t blame them for trying. What else can be tried? 43 years of whatever ‘I’ am hadn’t budged. Though it was if course around 8 months after my brother died in my arms.
The point being, i am relatively unscathed compared to many. Or at least it seems to me. Or maybe it’s just that “birds of a feather” find each other, so i attract damaged people.
My sample group is biased by me.
Though, i doubt it. The stats on child abuse, rapes, bashings, and all the forms of mental abuse are clear.
1 Like
To be clear, when I was an affer and didn’t understand or implement Actualism, I espoused this “people aren’t trying hard enough” reasoning. And unsurprisingly, it didn’t work for me. Jon seems to be thinking that that’s what I’m saying now, which it isn’t. From what you write here maybe you think I’m saying it too. But that’s not the case at all.
Though it can be simplistically put that the way to do it is to “just do it”, and that isn’t wrong per se, it doesn’t generally work as advice - and if you re-read my initial reply and the explicatory follow-up I don’t think it can be said that that’s what I was saying.
Rather what I’m getting at is that it is a fact that the Actualism method is easy when you are being naive. Anyone who has had the experience of naively enjoying being alive can attest to this. This is not advice, it’s a fact that others can corroborate with their own reports.
The question then is how to get from here (not being naive) to there (being naive). And “just try harder” has no value as advice because it isn’t really about trying hard. You can’t try hard to enjoy something … you either enjoy it or you don’t. If you’re trying hard it means you aren’t enjoying it lol.
That being said it is also a fact, that others can corroborate, that it’s ultimately simply a matter of choice - of choosing to be that way and become that way, to become better-disposed, more good-humored, more readily in a good mood, etc. Again this is not advice, it’s a fact that can not be disputed.
The question then is, how to make the choice? While ultimately it is true that you make the choice just by making it, that has limited benefit in terms of advice.
What I have noticed in my experience is that when you do make the choice, it is automatic. Something clicks and the choice is made. So again “trying hard” is not the way to make the choice. You can’t try to make a choice. You either do it or you don’t.
So the question then is, what to do to make it click?
And the answer here is “whatever you possibly can” 
. What works well for me is to reflect, ponder, contemplate various things about being alive and conscious. Such as the fact that it is always now, for example. This brings a delightful tone to experience.
Another is to simply refuse to believe that I am meant to be unhappy. It is not a matter of believing I am meant to be happy… but rather simply not believing that I am meant to be unhappy. And not believing any other of a host of things. This has made things much simpler which makes it easier to enjoy myself.
Another is, next time you find yourself enjoying for whatever reason, take stock of the quality of experience, appreciate it, compare it to feeling bad, reflect on whether you do ever really need to feel bad, etc. This helps to see that it’s silly to feel bad.
It depends on the situation. For extremely intense and deep passionate emotions, like grief when my mother passed away, what worked there is to simply fully go into it, allow myself to feel it, with keeping a reflective eye out to observe it all and see how it all really works.
Basically I would say it comes down to keeping an eye on the prize - whether it’s getting back to neutral or feeling good or great or having an EE or a PCE - and witnessing everything with openness and curiosity to gain the experience needed to navigate it all. And the more you do it the better you get at navigating it. And what makes it a lot easier is getting a taste of naïveté and using that as a guide, putting a pin in it to be able to get back to it more readily next time, etc. Maybe it takes months between feeling naive at first , but then that can go to weeks and days etc if you know to look for it.
It is ultimately simple and easy once you get the knack of it , but that doesn’t mean everything before that point is also easy and simple. But everything is tricky and hard at first and then simple once you get better at it. So that’s not unique to Actualism.
And I don’t think it makes sense to be disheartened if it isn’t simple and easy currently. It’s like watching the drummer of Dragonforce do a 200BPM blast beat without breaking a sweat, and then picking up drum sticks for the first time and being frustrated that you can’t reproduce it. It is easy for the Dragonforce drummer… and I think it is good to know that it ultimately is easy. But it doesn’t mean it starts off easy. But it gets easier as you go.
And it sort of works out that you see in hindsight that all the things that seemed difficult actually had simple resolutions and are easy in retrospect - but it doesn’t mean they were experienced that way at the time.
So I’m not saying “just try harder”, but I am replying in a naive way to what I see as somewhat cynical and perhaps overcomplicated viewpoints so that this naïveté view may perhaps spread and have the reader feel naive themselves, and then they can take it from there. As I see, it’s impossible to combat the wisdom of the real world, so if the wisdom says it is impossible to do and it doesn’t work, then so be it, can’t argue with that 
. But if that feels an unsatisfying conclusion in any way, then perhaps set the wisdom aside and reflect on some of these points again.
@claudiu Thanks for the extensive reply.
I wasn’t thinking of your reply specifically when talking about people trying harder.
However, it can’t be easily helped that trying is needed, and that trying harder is the natural thing to do when that does not work out.
I was actually pondering out the back while sitting in the sun, whether it would be good for me to document an adaptation if the method which does try to fill in the “bridge” between trauma and being naive enough to make those choices that do work.
Naivete is, I am told, the key. However, as you rightly say, getting there is the trick.
What i am saying should be taken as general pondering, I am not critical of Richard, yourself, or anyone in how actualism is presented. There is no “actualism grand council” passing out holy edicts to the masses. Just people trying to help themselves and others to experience life better.
It’s perfectly normal that actualism would be like anything else in terms of effort and effectiveness.
Some people have the natural motor skills to play at 200BPM, some can train to that level, and some may not ever get there.
Thankfully, naivete isn’t a motor skill. Or i would definitely be completely fucked. 
I will take another read of the responses here, because it’s very cool to be chatting about my favourite topic.
Hmm, i think the key maybe right there, ; spontaneous crying, what about spontaneous naivete?
Hmm.
So instead of trying, there must be moments when naivete is naturally there. Unless, i am suppressing it.
Hmm… Very interesting.
3 Likes
I really like that explanation you gave in your post.
When it is easy, it will indeed be easy.
It won’t be hard forever, whatever it takes to have a few experiences, will, like my skill of crying, be easier.
And… Hopefully addictive. 
1 Like
@claudiu Naivete has never clicked for me but something you said here gave me an aha. You seemed to be saying that naivete is enjoying and I understand that. I have been enjoying for most of the time for a long time. I just never knew that was what was meant by naivete.
1 Like
@jamesjjoo yes, i like what @claudiu explained, and there is a serendipitous cross over with our discussion on crying.
Sadness can, when triggered and not suppressed lead to spontaneous crying.
Naivete can, when triggered and not suppressed leave to spontaneous enjoying.
Same. Same.
That’s the hypothesis, now for some experiments.
In fact, Richard explains in detail about the suppression of naivete through out the childhood experience.
I don’t really remember being naively enjoying things, but i also know just how selective my memory is to keep myself, me.
1 Like
No feeling is the enemy.
Spontaneous “feels” are what we are working with here. It’s all a feeling being has.
So, i need all hands on deck. All “feels” are, me, doing something together.
Naivete! Are you in there? All the bad people are gone, you can come out. It’s your time to shine kiddo! 
2 Likes