The 51st Journey.

I have been having a few interesting experiences lately.

The gate 51 is an interesting one in the human design. It is the sun point of the actor for the Breaking Bad character 'Hank Shraeder'. Who had experiences in the series that I think are typical of this gate.

I would like to do a video with a few points on Breaking Bad characters but have not gotten around to it.

The character experiences quite a few moments, it is a repeated theme. Where, shock itself comes along quite a bit, but the shock, leads in the 'detective' like direction of realising people around him are not whom he thinks they are. Realising people that he has had long drinking sessions with were hiding unbelievable secrets, essentially big enough to be different people. 

I think this is a big part of what the 51 is. Having the sudden realisation that people are not what you thought they were. I have it in two places in my human design. One is the design Venus. This means that no matter what these experiences will be in my life quite a lot and, as I have said before, I can't shortcut that process. It is illogical to go into a situation thinking that, knowing that, you will at a future point receive a shock about someone. To just assume people are lying about themselves in some important way. 

Then, once I have had these experiences, and have gained this wisdom. Obviously I will be able to articulate a reality that others are not ready to face. Meaning that as the shock is given to me it is also given to others. 

It's all very tiring. But, I think it is important to try and love the process as much as possible. Since, we don't have a choice about said process. Only if we are going to enjoy or hate being taken on said journey!

Psychological insights part 1.

My thoughts this morning. This is the result of the psychology work I am doing on myself. This is very good because for years I had none of these insights despite being interested in the area. This was because physiologically I was often in fight or flight and generally too dysfunctional for them to come. 

But anyway, I woke up this morning and a little while in had one of the most profound insights. I felt kind of 'active' in the morning and pulled up a youtube playlist on my phone called 'smut'. Things like Tik Tok girls, girls scantily clad doing tasks like operating gadgets and giggling, and those "would you employ this secretary?" kind of videos. 

While I was watching one of the posts. A blonde standing infront of the camera with large breasts pushing them from side to side with her body. I had this realisation that... this girl would have nothing to do with me. I know the kind of guys she would have something to do with. Tall, muscular, well employed, with really smooth social ability, and willing to make personal sacrifices to get laid.

Not a profound point probably to a lot of guys but one, because of reasons I'll go into perhaps, has not actually been one that has occured to me previously. 

When I was younger, very young, like almost some of my formative memories. I can recall my mother saying to me frequently that I was so good looking that I would have all the girls after me. This was not just her saying it I have had attention from girls. But I have a disability, am unemployed, have little money and no social skills to speak of. I do think I am intelligent and interesting but, the general ability gained from experience of socialising with women and being a bit more normal is not there. 

I think for this reason it has never occured to me that I might be rejected and this probably comes off in my body language and such a bit with women. But what experience do I actually have with women? Have I been rejected?

I do have some experience with women and those that have clearly indicated interest willing to go all the way. But I have also been rejected a lot. I have asked out girls over voicemail. Not every girl that flirts would have been into me had I tried to follow up, some of them would have just been looking for attention themselves. 

This changes my lust a bit which I have been struggling to get a hook into. Struggling to get insight into. Living with such an ongoing but unproductive sensation does not sit well with me (especially as these vastly increase due to increased physical health). I used to want to write erotic stories to at least enjoy the sensation a bit, but there were various problems with that. One of many is that the story would tend to dissolve once I got to a point where I instinctively felt something was unrealistic. I was trying to fashion a realistic story about fetishtic behaviour that people probably wouldn't do in real life. (I remember one story where I was in a relationship with a girl that got to the point where she was motivated to do degenerate things, but then she snapped out of it, thought "what the hell am I doing?" and filed for divorce!)

But this is an insight that goes the other way. Not towards increasing, and finding a good manifestation of that sexual energy, but one that goes towards the other area. A reason to not find certain girls attractive and perhaps, to in general relate to the entire area in a more realistic way. Of being aware of some of the undercurrents. 

I have written before, but I can't remember where, on people that ignored me on youtube comments and how rude I thought it was. Now I've just started thinking perhaps this was some of the reason. I recall, by name, each woman in the human design where I wrote a comment and they didn't respond despite having very little other responses. That's didn't respond even once not that they responded to one and did not afterward. 

So perhaps there is a sexual element to this? Perhaps the girls are trying to say you are sexually rejected because they assume I am into them? They would not be the first women to assume that absolutely any attention going to them from a male was sexual. 

Anyway, considering these rejections. This is likely a very positive look into the area for me. If I were to go on the Tik Tok girls now I might think which would or would not accept me and that number is probably close to zero which strongly motivates me to not give them any attention or 'love'. What I can focus on when understanding women is what are my actual experiences with them. Not that I had an opportunity to relate to x woman, because there are a lot of incorrect impressions that can be created. But what are my actual experiences with them.

Thoughts on my design.

A post on various human design thoughts. 

Firstly, gate 33 is a big part of my chart. Two points on the conscious side. Gate 51.1 specifically is two points on the unconscious side and this comes up. Trying to remind myself this is all design based because it's manifestation is... a little disconcerting sometimes. 

I recall reading Ra Uru Hu saying something like the gate 33 is the abstract process and of note, at the end of an experience, the abstract process is at it's weakest. Only after that withdrawal of the gate 33 and reflection, does the abstract process start to gain strength again. 

I also have the gate 25.6. This means that the 51-25 channel, whole channel, is going from a first line to a sixth line and it is definitely a pattern of mine to attempt to find meaning in the most base experience. I also have gate 44.1 going to gate 26.4. 

With also the 21-45 both being ruthless sounding lines. Gate 21.2 which is something like 'hard action to oppose deliberate interference' and 45.4 in detriment something like 'The lack of spiritual expression on the material plane'.

Putting a lot of this together, also with my 11-56 and general tendency to pay attention to things like dream interpretation. It all leads to a kind of machiavellianism. Splenically defined and right minded means I really respond very quickly in the moment to things. The right minded doesn't lay out a plan and structure, it simply comes in with something that seems perfectly relevant to the moment, but that is kind of random. 

The 51-25 is quite gutteral and base. The initiation channel. The specific shock of the 51 often involves the insight that someone is not what they appeared to be. This sense of looking below the surface of things is like being followed by ghosts. Others want to believe a certain thing about a thing or person and the 51 is like 'No, that's not the case, because of x experience', and "normal people" are very willing to socially ostracise to avoid that information modifying the way they would prefer to perceive the world. 

I think interesting in the human design are those parts where people have a choice whether to hear someones channel and choose to reject it and ostracise the person instead. It's like, what is the difference between having the channel and people avoiding it and not having the channel? What is the energy difference?

Anyway, the whole chart put together like I said is incredibly machiavellian. It flies very much against the mainstream preference for a kind of lovey dovey - "enable-abusers-with-forgiveness-without-contrition" vibe. 

The entire energy stream starts out in the 44 which I have identified as kind of the 'anti forgiveness' hexagram. The 44 is ancestral memory which is retained for safety. So it is not going to say "Let's just let go of the fact that person is incredibly toxic - for group cohesion" - maybe the integration channel would do that. It's simply going to say "That person is a degenerate and I don't want them near me". 

I have also mentioned that I favour the teachings of one Stefan Molyneux. This, I think, comes partly from the gate 4.1 in my conscious Mars. This is Stefans reasoning process and it is so similar to mine that I like listening him to gain access to my own self. The fact of challenging what is assumed to be correct, what is stated as correct, perhaps for the same reason that links to the 51-25. But as with the defined G-self and Stefans incarnation cross, all 4 hexagrams being on the G-self. It also ends with moral discussion and reasoning the can really challenge others .Can really challenge things like passive aggression through moral reasoning. 

It eventually leads to this place where, due to a bunch of complex reasoning and spirituality, I have explained some deep psychological process but now I'm not going to see the person for a while. There is time for processing and withdrawal. The manifestor type means there isn't any particular "stickiness" to other people and the combination of moral reasoning as well leads to a kind of requirement on the part of the others person. Due to that normal sacral connection being missing, they need to independently take understandings in order to relate. All this is in there. The 51-25, maybe the 44-26, the 4.1, but then the 33 and other parts of the chart disconnect, and they have to DO something with that energy to remain in connection. 

In my life there have been many machiavellian movements. Such as having someone be passive aggressive, in a way that can't be immediately challenged, and feeling relief when their behaviour comes back to them in an extremely traumatising way. People ghosting and me not being happy with that or thinking its fair but... it is what it is. Moves like apologising for something, then saying I'd meet someone, only to have them ignore that and not meet. Then being able to call them on it six months to a year later. Like... I did everything required by the social ritual. It is yet again a long term process of drawing out subtle, unpleasant behaviour, that isn't easily challenged. 

Again and again these kinds of things happen and after them, all the pieces of the chess board have been set up. I have said the apology, I have my explanation of how I dealt with the person, I have given something of value, even if that is not acknowledged by the other. Everything is set up so the person can't deliver passive aggression without having to walk back their own amorality. 

There is one exception to most of this. One energy area and channel that delivers something else. Something different. That is the manifesting channel 21-45 which has as one of it's points the North Node. Ie. it isn't completely switched on until I've lived life.

Part of me fears that my position of low status will never change due to my health. Which has moments of improvement but is usually a grind. But a strict reading would say that what would be likely would be some material success coming from that. Some success of some sort of bringing that will power into the real world.

This would potentially change the game in quite a devastating way. All these people that have done crappy things and this long slow process of challenging that. Of challenging the passive aggression by bringing out, partly through coincidence, real moral principles as part of the discussion. 

People being able to treat me in a bad way due to the low status from- disability of all things. Then suddenly, after bad behaviour for years, find out that I am doing well in some way. Successful in some manner and them wanting to gain benefits from that but there being a struggle to make that a reality with all the subtle, deliberately unacknowledged crappy behaviour over years. I'll repeat as well, the reason this was gotten away with is due to disability. 

We'll see what happens. The process, this process that goes through the chart and tends to end with these periods of semi exhaustion so the abstract process starts a process of strengthening, is as exhausting as it sounds. But maybe, just maybe, the reasoning from spiritual sources has set up quite a chess board - and we are moving closer to a check mate!

The worlds catalyst and humility.

I saw a tweet a little while ago, that said that a guy had been dating and was really very sick of what he had been subjected to.

It gave me a strong feel of futility and that there must be some 'point' to all this crap. In general, I have found that when something negative is revealed, it is actually the positive forces revealing the thing and the negative that was done was when this thing was still hidden. So, as an example, now we might hear about horrible divorce cases, but for years those cases happened and people were not allowed to criticise women. There was no 'manosphere', so people suffered in silence. 

The global game.

It is an area of interest though especially as I think of myself and my own life. I am better, healthier, stronger recently. I have never had a problem of desire at getting myself to the gym. I have never not wanted to go because I appreciate being well enough to go a great deal, and I have a strong physiological tension that has been created from my medical condition, I am quite an angry person. People I know don't get the brunt of it unless I have to legitimately defend myself. But the anger is there, and getting it out at the gym is a true blessing. I don't think I will stop going for as long as I live.

But as I get healthier I am also dealing with the complete lack of 'normality' from a person that has spent so little time generally socialising and doing normal things, and is only just well enough recently, and only just. I am starting to be legitimately well enough to work. Not, as previously experienced, working and having to push through it fight or flight style. But legitimately able to work and be psychologically comfortable to do so. 

But "starting" to be well enough for work means I will start low in any heirarchy past my twenties. I have not studied to gain enough skills (aside potentially some of the spiritual things I talk about) and I have little experience socialising, and little experience with women, and I am not completely well, I still lose hours a week to my medical condition. I look OK, I can get my foot in the door, I am intelligent, quick witted and fun. But it is not practically likely that I will get a girlfriend/ wife, children and all that. 

The world according to Stefan Molyneux, and perhaps indirectly that according to the Law of One, is to be massively positive about dating, relationships and women. To seek marriage and family. But in practice, it is likely, like I said, that won't be an option for me. 

I wonder, like anyone who gets involved in spirituality and also has a health condition, what the meaning of some of my medical issues might be and I also wonder, if part of the reason I am the way I am is to fit in with some sort of "global war" in some manner. Like a spiritual war. Like, when higher self me was planning this life was it partly planned so that I make up a statistic to pressure society in a certain way?

This seems like the kind of thing I would do. I also think, referring to a system that I haven't massively explained on this blog and haven't explained well on my youtube channel, that the fifth density in general, and I believe myself to be a fifth density wanderer, is very on the ball with these strategic global decisions. I think that is a big part of why they accompanied the sixth density here. 

So what's the reason?

What is the reason then for this kind of global dissatisfaction and the many issues the manosphere talks about? I have spoken previously about not fully believing the manospheres issues but I do think, I do know, that some of them are very legitimate because of things I have experienced in the real world. 

When I look at people planning their lives (in the grand, godly, sense of the world) I can't think that they would not plan to be partnered up and push forward to achieve positive goals together. Nevertheless, this could very well not be what is planned. 

It seems to me interesting the amount of catalyst leading to a change in the way the genders and relationships relate. The number one way that women gain income is through divorce. Women own about 90% of consumer debt. Women vote left and would be the majority pressure for things like experimental medical treatments. Many women, break up 20 year long marriages because they want to buy a lot of things, the guy goes to work all the time to earn the money for that, then the woman feels like she is being neglected by him. 

The female need for resources and the entitled selfishness in absorbing them without giving anything in return seems like it is a very powerful energy at the moment. In America, one state in America decided to ban alimony. I learned that after divorce even when there are no kids involved women are receiving a lot of money into their 50's. Basically living for free due to alimony laws and that about 50% of the men in American prisons are there because they can't pay child support. 

Real world.

I want to say that this pattern is not showing up in my personal life. I had a twenty year old female family member the other day give me an honest and good apology. None of my male friends in their thirties have ever shown a sliver of that maturity, not one time in their lives at least to my awareness. There are other ways I have felt women in my life have shown themselves to do very well. 

Nevertheless, one thing most women show, even those that are moral, is loyalty to the establishment. Another thing is an absolute refusal to move in any way against their more amoral sisters. I think when things move forward, when push comes to shove, I think it is women that will be getting a lot of catalyst, a.k.a "shock" when learning the way the world really works. 

Maybe this is the reason for the dating troubles. The only way society crumbles enough that the deep state is weakened is if guys in general stop giving resources to women, that is kind of happening as men withdraw. This is partly because, men are happy without a lot of resources. If things look difficult they will go to work and live in a room and play computer games in the evening. Whereas, women need life. They want to experience things hence the 90% of consumer debt statistic.

It starts to creep in to giving them consequences for not reflecting on the effects of their behaviours (such as expecting a husband to be both present and earning money at the same time), including voting (i.e. probably voting to tax said husband so he earns less).

I have no firm answers here but it is an interesting thing to consider I think. 

The human design, at least one interpretation, predicts a massive baby boom soon ish. Perhaps this will happen once society goes through enough tension to get rid of the left wing elements. Men start earning, and women are put through enough shock to have a bit more humility.

The spiritual nature of work.

Ah.

For some reason even talking about 'work', I suddenly feel deflated. As though I suddenly had to work and to be fair, I have just stopped with a very "work" style problem. Where a lot of inconvenience has started, that doesn't feel really fair, and that I don't feel is due to my doing, but requires me to do a bunch of stuff anyway. 

Work.

But nevertheless, the way the world works is that with its many confusing areas. It is very easy for something that is actually very negative to be represented as a positive. One example of this I think, is what a lot of millennial children were subjected to. They grew up with a 'follow your dream' mentality, then the crash happened and it was like 'Oh, sorry chap, the place where you go to follow your dream is not in operation anymore, the lights have been switched out due to financial troubles'. 

While it's not clear if everyone 'following their dreams'. Which was the cliche put forward in the absence of boomer guidance. Is possible in good economic times. In practice, in bad economic times, we can say quite definitively that "following ones dreams" to be a musician or movie star or something, will probably land you with a heap of debt and a minimum wage customer service job. 

But anyway. What working life has now become is in a lot of cases bare naked exploitation. The high performers being exploited to substitute the lazy people. Absolutely incompetent managers, that know nothing of management because business isn't A) paying for said managers, B) training managers or C) giving managers enough leeway to actually make decisions and give concessions. 

But this, and working lifes many other problems, are not what work is 'meant to be'. They are, in a lot of cases the result of subtle globalist processes that change the economy. One example is small business taxes that keep new comers out of the market. These are deliberately pushed by corporations so they don't have competition. Another is, through some mechanism, very often immigration. Changing the employer- employee ratio to be very preferable to the employer. There are various other extremely destructive things that effect business.

Then you have a lot of things that are in competition with business, being in competition with business and being represented as better but this, because they are subsidized by taxation. Money is taken from the productive economy to the unproductive economy, where utter ineptness is promoted.  

'To live, to move and to work'.

But at it's heart, as a thing which starts from a spiritual principle, coming from the Law of One then that did have some quotes on this. Offhand remarks mostly. The general statement of 'work' is acknowledged to apply to the definition of work as we would see it. But it is also when people have done spiritual things. They have had the insights and such, and the positive forces. The 'Creator' or the spirits, reply and give something back in relation to that. Like, a new direction and meaning and such.

That is probably a very butchered understanding of the text, but it makes a little sense I think. 

I do a lot of things in my life that are not quite in the category of 'leisure' but don't, in any normally understood sense of the word, qualify as 'work'. For instance, pages and pages of dream interpretation. Years, and a many layered process of transcription, editing and interpretation to arrive at points I believe come at me from the higher positive forces and my higher self. 

Music. I love music. I really, really love music. But it's not fully "leisure" to play it. It involves digging up books about techniques. It involves really quite a lot of hard focus to create songs which, now that I am well enough to do so, has surprised me as to its effort. It feels wholly more productive to spend half an hour freestyle than to spend half an hour working on one of my songs. After which I will be lucky if I get one entire paragraph from and some accompanying riffs and such. But the latter is timeless in a way that the former might not be. It feels very much like a concrete achievement.

Money, money, money.

I suppose music is acknowledged as 'work'. But in general, there is another type of work which is the work that we do to get money. 

As I have said before in this article. I believe that work itself is a virtue; and that the invisible rules of life form around that truth. If I work and bring in money, it will effect those around me positively. It is also one of the only things that properly changes a guys status. If I work and get a lot of money this will effect people in my life that just were not willing to give me any respect. Just assumed, consciously or otherwise, that they were entitled to treat me badly. If I were to work and get money I know it will be one of the only things to palpably effect them (not that I will spend any time with them and re- meet them, but just something relevant).

This is one of the reasons that people who are disabled perceive a kind of unconscious disrespect coming from them from normal people in my belief. 

It is also one of the only ways to palpably change my life in relation to meeting people. The thing that will influence my life positively is most likely meeting others, as it always is. I might meet male friend and share some conversation, and/ or female friends/ potential intimate partners. As we've entered this amazing crash of society a lot of the social groups that meet outside work have disintegrated. If I were to go to one of those as well I would meet, probably nicer people on balance, but often people it feels like from the 'social reject' table in school. When I have gone to work I have been surrounded by mostly 20 year old girls a lot of the time. (Not that 20 year old girls are that interesting, but status wise, that is a very powerful social group!)

Work in some fundamental manner I believe, relates to the concept of 'power'. This is a spiritual and energetic concept.

Gender and reality.

The male need to 'work' is... It is painful. Even though there are male communists about and such, I would say the male need to work is as important and all consuming as the need for sex. I wonder, partly, if this message in itself relates to some part of my path, having astrological connections to one Stefan Molyneux, who talks a lot about the virtue of work and masculinity in relation to that. This links to concepts already discussed, but I don't know if I can go there.

The unbelievable toxicity of the left is, what I believe, is keeping society stuck based on a very fundamental and natural, organic expression of what would be an automatic positive social change if not interfered with. 

Namely, men work harder. They are driven to work harder, and once they have worked unbelievably hard and justifiably earned from that, they should ideally earn respect, status and money. This is the force that drives society forward to a more positive place. Because men have a lot of testosterone. Testosterone drives people to succeed and it also drives a state of constant improvement and men, are very technical thinkers. 

The problem for globalists comes when men are enjoying things. Are in a state of constant improvement, which is related to actually receiving benefit from the work they are doing. They then start working on what the problem is in their minds in a very deep way. Perhaps by publicising the problem, or forming political parties. Moving against where the globalists have acted in nepotism and theft. What globalists are doing in their various parasitical projects, is noticed, and the male mind and spirit starts moving to counteract it. 

Entitled women, taxation, DEI and MeToo throws off that eventual result. But most of these tactics are so incredibly effective that they not only prevent men from moving against parasitical dysfunction. But, actually, destroy and dissolve the entire society and that's what we are witnessing. A system either grows or it dies. There is no halfway. A lot of those in power want this halfway, and they do at least have the amount of power to make a good go of it. But they have mistaken their economic and political power for godly power, and god/ reality can't be mocked. Everytime they prevent movement forward they disintegrate a little further, and this is where we get things like Japans currency crisis. The middle ground cannot be held indefinitely.

Conclusion.

Let me be clear though, just mentioning one potential misunderstanding. Work is a virtue, but it is not a virtue that conquers all other virtues. As an example. One of the philosophies that 'boomers' in general seem to have is 'I go to work and come home, therefore I am as virtuous and innocent, and immune from accountability as anyone can possibly be'.

The boomer 'sin' is neglect of the world in general. It is watching disturbed people that would not be out of place in a hellraiser film, that want to convince young children to cut their genitals off, take positions of powers in schools and boomers doing NOTHING against it when... Whose responsibility is it to fix that kind of thing if not the boomers and when, if not when the problem actually started? 

The boomer sin is passivity and the refusal to stand against evil. To even define evil as evil because that requires active engagement. It is the sin that will cost an unbelievable amount as we as a society are made to realise that evil does in fact exist, probably through societal collapse.

Anyway though. This blog, in a way I think, is one of my forms of 'work'. It is the work I have constructed for myself since disability has lead to a lot of reading and not working in the traditional 9-5 sense of the term.

This specific article is less directed than I expected. So it will have to finish here without a really firm conclusion as to what the point of it is.

The psychology of Walter White. Part 3.

I watched a few of the interviews with the cast and crew of this show and it makes me want to scream a bit. The director, obviously a high IQ human being, says that when you watch it it is your interpretation and him and the cast only have their interpretation. Their interpretations are often quite pedestrian and don't feel correct to me. Which is bizarre. They are more likely to be right than me with their familiarity with the material.

It also brings me to a point about story writing in general. One of the early philosophers, when he wanted to find out the meaning of life. The first place he went was to writers of fiction of the day. He said after hanging out with them that they were morons. He theorised, that the reason their stories were so layered and insightful, is because that kind of creative work is a kind of channeling. 

The director made reference to different writers writing scenes so it is obviously a collaborative effort. There is no single vision for Walters character.

The road already travelled. 

My previous two articles on the subject have said this. Article one: That a lot of the drives that make up Walters life are adequately explained by a suppressed individual with high intelligence. Two: Three things impacting his behaviour. One is that he is more comfortable with violence than a normal person. Two is that he is obviously taking on a narcissistic mask in pretence for various agendas. Which I feel dismisses narcissism as an accurate consideration of his psychology. Three, the show makes reference to, and philosophy itself might bring light to, the idea that what Walt is doing isn't actually explicitly unethical, or at least not less unethical with a lot of common business practice.

On the narcissism aspect, I think the show tries to make us think that in some ways, but I don't think it is true. It is part of the general psychology of society I think, to try and explain normal relationship drama as "narcissism". 

The theory that I come back to with Walter, or the observation I make. Is that there are two strong parts of his psychology. I want to first state that it is just not part of how I think to believe that he went through some sort of mystical journey of accessing his shadow self, and desensitising to violence from being a normal person. I just don't go for that. Genetically, psychologically speaking, we do not go through a lot of those journeys in real life. Someone that is comfortable with a great deal of violence a year into a business like that, was always comfortable with it. 

It seems to me, and I think this might be shown symbolically by the choice of name given to the company that he originally started. "Grey matter technology". What is grey matter? Grey matter is the part of the brain that is responsible for empathy.

I wonder, if Walter is a psychopath. Or at least has a lot of psychopathic traits and a few ways that his character was less than perfect written in. 

Like I said in the last example. Things come to a head at the end of season 3 and to save Jessie, who is upset and wanting to take on truly hard individuals on a moral point. I.e. going to get himself killed. Walter simply runs down a couple of rival drug dealers and shoots one of them in the head. This scene is unbelievably violent. This combined with the other violent things he does throughout the show and very early in the show. Might mean that he simply doesn't have a conscience, and that he conforms to a psychopathic psychology in a lot of ways. 

We see for instance, he is uncomfortable killing Krazy - 8. But this is his first foray into (deliberate) violence. He might not have insight into himself that he is this unusual and he might have a sense of dread doing violent things because he does not yet know that it is not an issue for him. After that scene, where he kills Krazy - 8, he simply cleans up all the issues and leaves a pristine basement for Jessie. Walt is obviously comfortable with violence in a way Jessie isn't. He experiences none of the internal strife that lead to Jessie screwing up the dissolving of the other body. Where Walt would simply have sawed the body in half so it fits in the correct containers. 

This opens more questions. 

One scene that I think shows this well, and indicates that the writers must have had some idea that this was a possible explanation from Walter. Is the scene where the students were having grief over the plane crash and Walter comes in with loads of technical information. Firstly, the technical information he expresses is ONLY accessible in that way for someone with very high IQ.

High IQ and psychopathy seems to fit most of the boxes. 

But next lets go to morality. Because something incorrectly believed about psychopaths is that they are inherently, genetically, driven to be amoral - not just amoral but anti- moral. They have amoral tendencies sure, because of a lack of fear. But being amoral is a malfunctioning strategy. The higher IQ someone has more often, the less violence they will use. This is very true on a societal level. 

So how does lack of fear explain his other behaviours? Well, what is the moral argument against cooking? Is it the worst criminal undertaking in the world? It is, after all, consentual trade. Illegal and immoral is not the same thing (a statement definitely true as the UK government walks around jailing people for social media posts!) It is also not terrible in comparison to a lot of other standard industry practices. I.e. putting poison in food. Raising the prices of pharmaceutical drugs, and many other things. 

I don't have a good answer to this question I am just talking here. Let's say that cooking is NOT that amoral. Does that change our understanding of the situation?

Well, perhaps. His relationship with Skylar basically became she did not like him engaging with an illegal and dangerous business. But perhaps he does not respect that motivation. There are times in a mans life where he feels that a woman, women or general, and/ or his wife, has engaged in irrelevant neuroticism and he just kind of ignore and routes around it. 

This outlook might be relevant to a lot of the things that happened in the show. Hank didn't get the best deal when coming into conflict with Walter. But we see no real cruelty of Walter to Hank. Hank was just getting in his way in a sense. Hanks morality is very simple. If it is illegal then it is immoral. So Walt simply finds his way around Hank (remember Hanks eventual end - the killing of Heisenberg, was not Walters doing!)

Manipulation.

We do have to come to Jessie. Something that cannot be jettisoned from any understanding of Walt. To this I will admit that Walts behaviour towards Jessie was extremely unethical. 

But at the same time, if we take down the mythology of a super criminal mastermind away from his other behaviours. If we compare him to other normal behaviours in the world it might bring some light.

Two things that have influenced Walters behaviours. Maybe three. One is that Jessie is very skilled and has been trained by Walt. Remember that Todd was not able to pick up cooking like Jessie was, and Todd was eager and not specifically tagged as not intelligent. Jessie is probably quite intelligent as well, and that's probably what drew him and Walt together subconsciously. So Jessie represents a very valuable employee of sorts. 

How are valuable employees actually treated in the workforce in general? Are they exploited? Are they given false promises so they work hard for no reward? Are they sometimes tricked into staying in non preferential situations by managers who don't want to lose their working capabilities?

Second. Walters worst manipulation of Jessie, the poisoning of Brock, happened when he believed his family could be killed by Gus. A lot of us don't know what level we will stoop to if we were threatened with that kind of violence. 

Third, some of the last scenes with Walt and Jessie specifically when Walt hands Jessie over to Todds uncle. Well, that is because Jessie "snitched". It is not right, but Walt is now involved in a culture that sees things like that. Also, Jessie if allowed to live would have gone straight back to the DEA; and Jessie has caught Walt once before. 

Jessie was involved in this line of work before Walt came along. 

No excuses.

I am not saying that any of these things excuse Walts behaviour. The fact that high value employees are often exploited, does not make it suddenly moral to exploit them. But we can see a cause and effect here that does not take in some of the more ridiculous ideas floating around about Walters psychology. It does not mythologise his manipulative capabilities as the "narcissist" (i.e. Devil incarnate), or add in some irrelevant mythology about a normal person becoming a drug kingpin.

That's probably it for Walts psychology. There might be some other interesting things to not about other aspects of the show. I've been thinking of doing a youtube video with the actors human design talking about their characters. That is interesting. The human design shows heavily because... what else is there? If you are familiar Hal, the same actors character from another show, Malcolm in the Middle, had other very similar traits as Walter White. Which was used to explain why the kids in that show were such terrors.

But I can't see anything that needs additional explanation from Walter White himself per sey.

The psychology of Walter White Part 2.

So I wanted to finish this article. Or at least do part 2. I could always do another part.

But this is the video that will be the jumping off point for today, Youtube: Moon: Breaking Bad tried to Warn you:

https://youtu.be/ljQmp2TMamc?si=2UDQekSAR-cQHQW6

Summary:

This video was good and has come closer to what I have thought. But it is not the same. I have watched another video that says something to the effect that Walter White was the devil incarnate as well. 

One of the things the creator of this video says is that the symbology of the show shows that it is a metaphor for the corporate world. With Gus and his whole two face thing after he gets blown up! 

This is something that I have been thinking about lately. My previous article made the point that the male quest for status is very strong, and combined with the side effects of Walters intelligence, this is a large part of his motivation and what traps him on the course of action he took. 

But there is one barrier that I can see in considering Walter as a normal person that just got messed up in things. That is his comfort with violence. 

Violence.

Close to the end of season 3 the show is meandering through semi political mundane discussions. The action has wound down. Walter does not need to engage in violence because Gus is handling all the particulars of the business. 

But, as often happened in Breaking Bad, circumstances took an unexpected and brutal turn and suddenly, Walt has to act. He has to save someone from getting hurt and when he does. This is absolutely unbelievably violent.

While we see Jessies various forays with violence lead him to taking more drugs and cracking up psychologically. We see very little psychological distress from Walter at any point from his various forays into violence. Blowing up Tuco's building, it seems he just did it and then went home and went to bed. After discussing Todd killing a child with Jessie and saying that it was terrible and all that, we see him comfortably whistling while cooking a few minutes later. 

In my last article, I excerpted a video that threw around the term of 'narcissist'. But I don't know if I see that. We see clear indication in Season 5 that Walter is attempting to put up a false psychopathic front when he tells Skylar infront of the police that he killed Hank because Hank "got in his way", because Walter always wins. Walter is not comfortable saying something like this because, perhaps, morally, it is a bit sick, and he has shown a lot of care, flawed as it may (may) be, towards his family. 

It also seems to me as though the show is trying to indicate that Walter is a narcissist, giving us very easy recogniseable points such as the gaslighting with Jessie and Skylar. But in the small print making it clear that he definitely is not. When Walt tells Skylar at the end that he cooked for himself and gave her and the audience a kind of moral "out". A way to blame the "narcissist", and not have any deeper perspective on the situation. 

But does it agree with the facts? No, it doesn't. Walter was clear early on that he was cooking and then intended to get out of the business. He tried it a lot and it was only unpredictable elements of the situation that kept him in said business. Plus, his only motivation through a lot of the show and his stated motivation is in fact providing for his family.

But the narcissistic behaviours he does show. Skylar being trapped in the way she was. Does give an easy plot device of this being an "abusive narcissist". But what other explanations are there here?

Morality:

One thing in the video included from today, is to reframe the moral situation slightly. This also annoys me when talking about this subject in youtube comments with people.

When Walt started cooking he had to do it. I cannot think of a more moral position to take than to try and take care of your family, to prevent them falling into masses of debt and to look after your son with cerebral palsy. 

The moral framing is this. That pharmaceutical companies are doing exactly the same and they are not illegal. Or that they are generally amoral. 

This can go further in relation to something else I heard about philosophically. That if the government tells someone to do something it does not change the morality from if the government had not told them to do that thing. 

This goes for the army and the police. The society has a very enabling view towards the army in my perspective. But, well, I don't know if that can be morally defended. 

Finishing up.

Anyway, I have more to say but am going to leave it here. But this is the beginning of how to frame the conversation on Walter. Before we can say what is going on we have to say what isn't. What isn't going on, by my estimation, is that the business Walter is in is specifically more unethical than a lot of normal businesses. Also, I am not taking narcissism to be his motivation. Since we see a clear reason for him to falsify narcissism in creating the myth of "Heisenberg" (Werner Heisenberg? Going to come to some symbology as well later).