The thought that hunts those who think of us the most is being of a something greater than ours. It is the search for the meaning that we crave for to fulfil our existence in life. We aim for something other than the manifestation that we acquire because of our realization of its incompleteness. Even the most narcissistic of us seek in similar vain. I may even argue that the only difference between who were deemed sane and those who are not is a corruption in the essence of meaning. For example, narcissists think that they can be of everything without paying pain and guts.

The thing that we rarely realize, however, is that we will never become truly of something more significant. We cannot be beyond the existence we already are. Elaborating, we cannot change this essence by an inch. Yes, we do change some of its physical manifestations, even when they affect our own perspective on the world, but we cannot change what we are inside. Only the behavioral patterns, recognition patterns, problem sets, etc. Even on a physical level, we never increase our physical occupation of self. The only aspect that may give us such a feeling is the mental distortion of our conceptual model.

It may seem to some that the significance they seek is becoming an irreplaceable part of their essence, but, through experience, it can be proved otherwise. Some, despite that, may go to the lengths of calling it their true self, existence, manifestation, or whatever new buzz word they use to represent some notion about their self.

I, in contrast, would argue that we are forever alone, never becoming something more than what we were born with, not the genetic traits we inherent, but the metaphysical spiritual ethos that we have. The limits of the concept and physical are defining our boundaries within the reality, and the spirit does not grow beyond.

This structural model, however, is not to be depressed from because what lose do we get when we are nothing but ourselves, none. Some may even argue that we free ourselves from the limits of whatever chains shall be put by whomever can be, although I may disagree to some degree with that specific claim by these specific people. Freedom from every single little detail of our the limitations beyond ours is not specifically a good thing. It, onto itself, may bring many sufferings: maybe it was not chains of prison but chains of protection. On the other hand, my own way to see this is that it is the freedom of suffering. After all, what to be suffered about in such a case, not much.