Anti-Guru Eliot

I am an anti-Guru and I am an egoist who makes more egoists.

Mostly people don’t ask me to be a Guru. Also I generally don’t ask for a Guru, I listen to smart people and disagree a lot with them. I listen to entertaining people and disagree a lot with them. Maybe I am just disagreeable. It may seem weird to these people that anyone should ask me to be a Guru. You would think, you should not be a Guru of any kind, thus the fact that you don’t want to be a Guru isn’t exactly newsworthy.

Sometimes people ask for Guru Eliot. I can only assume this is because I made it a point to be a therapist. I made it a point to be a therapist because I like many other people felt this was a substantial way to investigate life. I am not a Guru out of impulse, I am an anti-Guru naturally. I am only a Guru while making fun of being a Guru. This is when people ask me what they should do. This makes me think. They ask me what they should do in regards to a romantic relationship usually. Sometimes it is with larger life decisions, but usually it is related to love in someway.

I am an anti-Guru because I tell people that they already know which direction is most substantial, although when they have contradictory thinking, I point it out. Or when their choices conflict, I highlight that they conflict.

I generally think the idea of people morally imposing their will on others is bad. I believe this, but also I act in a way so that this belief is quite systematized. I also believe that people who act in ways which hurt other people without good justification is bad. These are both negative abstractions, but they guide me in a way that I check myself and ecourage people to listen to the sound of their own identification of what is substantial. This isn’t always a journey to happiness, the easy emotion, although it is somewhat related to it. Sometimes to approach what is substantial requires the sacrifice of other things which are substantial, but are less substantial.

I am an anti-Guru and I am an egoist who makes more egoists. I am an egoist who belives in a spectrum between self and concept via force in the world as the major dialectic. This is the sort of thing that people can have immediately I think, but people have a hard time grasping that, so I explain concretely to them the tension between their self-interest and the concept and the Actual force in the world of both. We explore their Freudian molecules they psychically generate and that exist, overcoded and condensed. People do what they want to do but then they feel guilty that they made a decision that one thing is more substantial than the other thing. The Freudian molecule contradicts, and they can’t essentialize and be satisfied. They can’t use the razor. I imagine a world where I am perfectly aware of motive and the exposition of concepts, which is to say I am accepting that people have wills which are articulated into demands in the world, and that these conflict, and that life for many is getting lost in these concepts rather than being a meta-anti-conceptual concept pusher. Sometimes I can’t use the razor, but I am trying to grasp the razor as best as I can. None-the-less I write to you here in my hidden world, that is to say away from the ears of discourse which I get paid for, that I am an anti-Guru who encourages an egoism of essence and substance.