True-self, unknowable?

1- If you know what something looks like, can you be that thing? By emulating characteristics and attitudes does that make you a certain way, or not? For instance, say you know what it looks like to be carefree. Does that mean "you" can be carefree? By appearing to be one way with others it would be hard for them to percieve you any other way. But, maybe you are not carefree and truly at the grain of your being is fear and trepidation. Are you a liar, then? Or, are you just strong willed?! Too strong to let mear idiots start to know who you really are on the inside. Is that a dangerous mascarade of emotions that you are simply unwilling to discover or, even worse, are uncapable of understanding? Far more dangerous than a lie. *unwilling/incapable - we'll pick it up later*

1- Before I get too far into this I must address an issue of word meaning. I am using the word 'lie' to denote any aspect of yourself that ultimately denies yourself. However, this is not accurate to the general meaning of the word. By definition a lie is a false statement with the intent to decieve. The glaring problem in my argument is intent. Someone may be completely misrepresenting themselves and not necessarily be lying. I think the word partrition would be more closely related to this discussion. However, not withstanding the disclaimer, I will continue on with my more shocking and skin curdling denotation - "liar."

2- Should I let my reader in on my intent? Do I just write to fancy myself, placing some random sentence next to another, some word with a set value next to its counterweight, and all of this with little to no concern with content and my impact on an audience? Just because? To ruffle invisible feathers, being "a rebel without a clue?" Well, by believing that you would be denying me as an artist. So, if you deny me as an artist then please, by all means. But, if you have any notion of what I think or feel, in hopes to shake the ignorant stongholds of hate and insecurity. Then maybe, we could all enter into a more realized relationship to our creator.

2- excerpt: "You Couldn't See Yourself Clearly"
"You are a liar! A mother %#$*ing liar, man! I thought we had something? >> I thought you were holding the International Peace for a reason. Based on principle? But, you were in it the whole time for yourself. Servicing me with your words // all the while, satisfying your pockets with power. ++ You took advantage of poverty. You gleamed with resentment at unjust socialization and yet you are the mask of revolution? And beneath your wax and plastic is the most hidious face of all! The face of truth."

1&2- In this excerpt, truth, is the misrepresented reality. Everyone has masked themselves to some degree. A mask of humility, understanding, happiness, public service, whatever? Existence is progressive. So, what occurs in the future is directly related to what we do in the present. This makes the idea of intent even more compelling. We essentially, by relying on our intent, are saying we know the future or have some idea of the future. Have you ever noticed a limitless stream of consciousness? It appears limitless but, it is not. It may be limitless to oneself. This is why we are comfortable with believing in our system of reality. Simply because it is the only system we know. However, it is not the only system we have access to. [Incoming Danger] Everything you know and experience stems from your consciousness. Perceptions and behaviors, though largely influenced by environment, are ultimately under your jurisdiction. So can "you" change?

Unwilling/incapable
1- Can you change? Are you unwilling, or incapable? I would argue that yes you can change, most generally. And I will limit my projections to matters pertaining to the mind - thought patterns, self idealizition and perception. What if you are "incapable." Strange word. Incapable, refers to inability/limitation. Some capabilities can only be manifested through willingness. (e.g. You must be willing to swing the baseball bat, in order to be capable of hitting the ball with it) Willingness can be seen as a catalyst for change. Some would argue that if you are currently uncapable, then you are incapable. That is a fatalistic view, in nature. Not that you are a fatalist, but call it what it is. Negativity, doubt, hopelessness. And these are all highly valid. And in themselves they are neither good or bad. Hopelessness can be a reality, hopelessness can also be a mindset. (This is where the English language really sucks, because I am not familiar with any word that separates these two meanings) And I apologize if it feels like I am barreling through these ideas. Hopelessness when applied as a mindset will cause an interesting reduction. If, as I mentioned earlier, some capabilities can only be manifested through willingness. and hopelessness (as a mindset) is an opponent to willingness. Then, hopelessness decreases the possibility of capability. Therefore, having a willingness to change will make it more possible to change.
Now, I realize this sounds elementary, but it is far from it (my ignorant little prude). Because what if a persons incapability lies in the realm of willingness? Willingness, as a form of hopefulness, presents a galactic catechism. How do you bridge the gap of willingness, to being willing/having willingness. This quickly diverges, in my mind, to a spiritually dark conversation. A very interesting one, though. One which I will pick up at a later date. Thanks for the cereal Capt'n Crunch!