On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Molly <mollyb363@gmail.com> wrote:
The wrath of Christ toward the money changers in the temple is
repeated in us until recognized. Recognition is the key. the
rational mind will always reason and compare because that is the
necessary function of it. When we base our identity in these
comparisons, we limit our own natures, because they are limited.
Witnessing not only what we think about, the form of the thought, but
how we think, our thinking processes, is what gets us beyond the
limitation of thinking. We get beyond with recognition. Experiencing
the world with a silent mind is like standing on the best viewpoint in
the Grand Canyon. Exhilarating. Being able to maintain a quiet mind
the majority of the time requires not only recognition (and
detachment) of thought, but the process of thinking. Thinking doesn't
stop. We stop basing our identities in it, and we use it less.
Few things bring us to the recognition of our experience beyond
thought like a good laugh, because it also brings joy.
On Feb 27, 1:49 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't disagree with Molly, though I was just presenting what her
> words 'rang' in me. My belief is that consciousness in used too
> infrequently - the basics of the mess of our communities and people is
> unconscious and broadly animal (the mess includes some good stuff).
> Consciousness is too easily overcome by cunning, and, as Molly says,
> narcissism.
> What has struck me for a long time is how difficult it is to present
> argument because it's too difficult to get anyone to take part
> 'honestly' - this is particularly difficult for teachers these days!
> In some areas, I have stopped thinking in standard ways - gender is an
> example. I tend to see in terms of certain types being fascinated by
> trinkets, fashion, gossip - one could imagine a shaggy dog story here
> in which these types all turn out to be women - but honestly that's
> not what I mean. I'm not interested in my identity as a man - but in
> terms of what I'm able to be and do - maleness is largely a
> constraint, animal and not much I want. The opportunities for
> identity seem very much off-the-peg and already detailed to copy. One
> modern identity that interests me is that of the 'empty creditor' -
> those who bring bankruptcy about through derivatives wangles. Some of
> my students clearly see such as models to copy - shrewd in money-
> making. The image of this identity in me is more one of the vile
> usurer demanding sex through threats of eviction in silent film. The
> apparatchiks quickly became entrepreneurchiks once Soviet rhetoric
> gave way to World Bank trash. There is surely a false individualism
> that is merely chameleon-like? And soul is denied RP. I suspect mine
> troubles me and I don't not welcome that given what I see around me!
>
> On Feb 26, 3:53 pm, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > The thes [THEs] that define this may come in undivided by duality, what
> > they have been multiplied with is to be experienced nevertheless.
>
> > On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:25 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The one who is aware of oneself and the others is the individual --
> > > and that cannot be without consciousness. The one that is unconscious
> > > is not an individual but the Soul from which all the individualities
> > > emanate. The identity is just the covering of an individuality.
>
> > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 7:33 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Ideas of identity are related to matter - I allow that to happen every
> > > > night.
>
> > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> I know my view is not that of the world.. if it was there would have
> > > >> been massive changes long ago,, the best I can hope for is to ask the
> > > right
> > > >> questions, throw out some ideas,, in talking with young people and
> > > >> hopefully they may start thinking and come up with ideas that they
> > > might be
> > > >> able to bring about change.. they are the one that have the
> > > responsibility
> > > >> now. My role at best would be of that of an elder.
>
> > > >> I do know you can not pay off debt with more debt. all though people
> > > will
> > > >> try to convince you that you can do it with poverty. whether they like
> > > it or
> > > >> not their souls are at risk.
>
> > > >> Our ideas need to be put out there for examination whether they are
> > > right
> > > >> or wrong, it doesn't matter..
> > > >> Allan
>
> > > >> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>> If what is on either side of the equal sign goes both ways, your
> > > >>> interpretation of my statement would be accurate. I think I was
> > > >>> saying that we confuse our world view for what is in actuality, our
> > > >>> individual view. In other words, we sometimes think the whole world
> > > >>> has a view that is actually just ours in the moment. There is a
> > > >>> narcissistic psychology to this that seems to be prevalent in those
> > > >>> that need to feel themselves "right" or superior or more powerful.
> > > >>> I've also found it interesting that everyone else in the room can
> > > >>> sometimes see it, but the person espousing. A good absurd joke can
> > > >>> bust through that illusion and humble us in a way that brings us to
> > > >>> the point of knowing that we know nothing, it is all a matter of view.
>
> > > >>> To discuss individuality, we should probably discuss identity, which
> > > >>> is what the narcissist will defend to the end, needing to be right,
> > > >>> see others as wrong and so on. How we create our identities has a
> > > >>> direct relationship to consciousness, because as more of our
> > > >>> consciousness is found in the infinite, and less in limitations, we
> > > >>> quite naturally let go of our stories, identity, our values - and they
> > > >>> are aligned with the eternal. We are by design, both finite and
> > > >>> infinite. Our identities are steeped in duality and limitation.
> > > >>> After a long day a work, a good comedy routine can help shed all the
> > > >>> tensions of the day, and restore my harmony. Resting my(our)self(ves)
> > > >>> in the paradox of the one and the many brings a good nights sleep.
>
> > > >>> On Feb 24, 4:06 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> > Molly made the point in another thread that we conflate individuality
> > > >>> > with what is really a world-view. Most of us like to think we have
> > > >>> > a good quota of individuality - but then express this as dedicated
> > > >>> > followers of fashion. I know as a teacher that trying to set up
> > > >>> > lessons that students really take hold of and do their own thing in
> > > >>> > relies an having some pretty unusual people in. Most students claim
> > > >>> > to want to do their own thing, but the vast majority will do no
> > > >>> > constructive work (even against my open standards on what this can
> > > be)
> > > >>> > if they have to organise it themselves. US society is often claimed
> > > >>> > to be the most individualistic in the world - yet look at the
> > > >>> > organisation in American Football.
>
> > > >>> > My own view is that our lack of individuality actually arises from
> > > the
> > > >>> > promulgation of celebrity, either as in mad political cults or via
> > > >>> > 'International Hollywood'. An example of the first is North Korea
> > > >>> > and, of course, we are the prime example of the latter. In our case,
> > > >>> > the ready-to-hand of ADMASS means we have almost no real public
> > > >>> > dialogue as everything is mediated through the crass world view and
> > > >>> > most people have soaked this up as their individuality. Quine made
> > > >>> > the point long ago that the notion of evidence is difficult because
> > > of
> > > >>> > something like this. People think the evidence has come from the
> > > >>> > outside, when in fact they only deal with what has impinged and
> > > >>> > networked in the world-view they have soaked up.
>
> > > >>> > There's a classic example of this about at the moment. It's debt and
> > > >>> > the way we construe the term in the way we think about household debt
> > > >>> > as the same as this economic-bankster stuff. Normal dialogue is
> > > >>> > impossible because most people can't understand the language because
> > > >>> > they have never invested the effort to get beyond an imprinted self.
>
> > > >>> > Much has been written on this, usually under the guise of paradigms -
> > > >>> > with the idea that we can learn different ones in external language.
> > > >>> > This seems a non-starter for me, as at least 85% of "language" is
> > > non-
> > > >>> > verbal and huge amounts manipulative. I would contend that
> > > >>> > individualism is the curse of our times and exemplified by such
> > > >>> > discussions as whether bankers and sports stars are worth their
> > > riches
> > > >>> > - always discussed in the paradigm of an individual meritocracy that
> > > >>> > goes unchallenged. From other perspectives the presence of these
> > > >>> > "individuals" is evidence of what they system produces and reason
> > > >>> > enough to change it.
>
> > > >> --
> > > >> (
> > > >> )
> > > >> |_D Allan
>
> > > >> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
0 comments:
Post a Comment