There are some curious similarities between feigning knowledge or understanding of a topic and abstract conjecture for the sake of discovery.
The characters you identify with can range from abstract types such as MBTI classifications or Hogwarts houses to specific moods of specific people or characters, real or fictional. Often we come across one that almost violently bursts into our imagination as an extremely relatable person/character/idea.
“That is me!” can be a wonderful feeling, but I think that anyone who ever ascribes their own persona to an idea or character or archetype is doing themselves a great injustice.
Within me: a universe that I seek to show.
Within you: a universe I have yet to know.
Expression, impression, reaction, reply,
projection, inflection, wink of the mind’s eye.
Observing, I wonder, wishing to see
Can your mind and mine play in the same key?
Rhythm in breath, lyric in thought,
harmony found; my attention is caught.
We feel not as sensory input
Not as distinct, deterministic sensory input that describes the explicit logical constructs of our world.
Cause and effect. Reference and reason. These are what we know and understand and verify and validate for reasons that at the very least are evolutionarily advantageous.
But why do we feel?
What is this dimension of perception that manifests as a sort of ever-shifting stained window between me and my reason?
What is the purpose of this negativity that vivifies dissonance and blurs order?
Why does my attention too frequently become seemingly restricted to some event or person, even hypothetical, such that I am incapable of productivity and am rendered helpless, unable to do much beyond FEEL about something?