About my physical nonhumanity

I've first spoke about my physical nonhumanity with this post, calling it philosophical only. And since making this post, I realize that I also mean it in a more literal way, and that the difference between literally physical and philosophically physical is incredibly confusing and vague to me. I instead see it as a vague area.

I don't like how some who are literally physical imply that the philosophically physical ones view it as something watered down, more shallow and as having the capacity to experience things that the metaphorical/philosophical ones can never hope to understand. And I also dislike the idea that literal nonhumans are taking it too far, and that the only way it can actually be experienced is through a philosophical lens. I don't really see anything good coming out of separating and gatekeeping the two as separate things. As I've already written on the subject, "by making the claim that you are physically nonhuman in a philosophical way, you are still addressing the body as physically nonhuman. And from there, they can modify the body or do whatever they want after that point. There are differences between the two, but I think specific similarities between the two are being overlooked." Someone who is literally physical and someone who is philosophically physical both attribute their body as something not human, for example. 

I don't know where the philosophical part of my identity starts and where the literal part of it ends, or if there is even a difference between those two things. This is because I view all of existence and consciousness through a philosophical lens. It feels pointless to try to label my experiences as one or the other.

Note: As a warning. there is a bit of disassociation and unreality talk in the next paragraph in the midst of my philosophical babbling.

( Read more... )