Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Dec 24, 2017 20:01:58 GMT
hmmm yes I imagine it isn't something you have often considered. You come across as fairly strong on the particular theme of autonomy, independence and capability. The problem is that those who are usually strongest on these ideas, are also often those that haven't found themselves in a position of 'this is not possible for me'. The other big problem is that we are still very in the dark in the West when it comes to understanding human functioning. We don't yet consider such things as sensitivities, energy, soul purpose. Some people are here to just do nothing much at all...and there's really nothing they can do about that. They may seem physically and mentally capable enough, but that doesn't mean they are. And in their own way, these people are teaching our society about the nature of 'worth'. AS I said, in the past I worked with mentally handicapped adults of a wide range of capability and even those who were very handicapped, benefitted from being independent to the degree they were capable...for some, that might have been as small an endeavor as using a fork by themselves, but still. But really, beyond that point, I'd say I'm stronger on the idea of do-gooders looking deeply at themselves to see that they are often attempting to derive a sense of well-being, empowerment via supposedly helping another deemed to be less able, less fortunate. Supposedly Good intentions, cloaked in ego, kind of thing. As I see it, ego is present in all aspects of our society, culture and institutions... including this forum. I mean, you are right about the do-gooding self-image etc but I think there are more problematic forms of ego than giving to others. |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Dec 24, 2017 20:04:52 GMT
You just can't say that. I know a lot of very awake people who are energy mechanics (that's how I would describe it). Of course, they may not fit into your judgement of what it means to be awake, but then again, it's possible that they might well see you as delusional. Cut out the continual one up man ship please, it's really quite pathetic. I'm not trying to one up you. I'm simply telling it as I see it. Why is it so important that you fit into the 'awake' category anyway? If you are content, who cares what that I label you as asleep? well that's the thing, I have very little interest in it, which is why the whole one up man ship 'awake' thing is just a continual drag to talk about. Who said I was content lol? Contentment is not something I think anyone should be feeling a whole lot of in our society. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Dec 24, 2017 20:23:24 GMT
As I see it, ego is present in all aspects of our society, culture and institutions... including this forum. I mean, you are right about the do-gooding self-image etc but I think there are more problematic forms of ego than giving to others.The whole "I am a good person who gives to others" idea is a deep, dark hiding place for ego though....ego is very, very easily obscured by such ideas. And those who deem themselves to be helping to create a better world through service to others are some of the most egoic, and least aware of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Dec 24, 2017 20:25:33 GMT
well that's the thing, I have very little interest in it, which is why the whole one up man ship 'awake' thing is just a continual drag to talk about. I say you're more interested in being awake than you think, or than you're letting on, 'cause my goal here is not to one up you at all, but rather, to talk about how being awake impacts the way one engages with life and what kinds of interests, fall away. Ah....yet another 'should.' |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Dec 24, 2017 20:35:24 GMT
well that's the thing, I have very little interest in it, which is why the whole one up man ship 'awake' thing is just a continual drag to talk about. I say you're more interested in being awake than you think, or than you're letting on, 'cause my goal here is not to one up you at all, but rather, to talk about how being awake impacts the way one engages with life and what kinds of interests, fall away. yes, but you carry these assumptions about your own status, which are highly subjective. If I consider you to be self-delusional, how am I going to accept what you say about the way that not being deluded impacts life? I see no point in sitting here repeatedly saying, 'I see you as self-delusional'...because obviously you don't see yourself as that. Equally, there is no point in you repeatedly saying such things to me. It makes for pointless conversation. Far better to just stick to what can be objectively ascertained and ignore who is self-deluded and who isn't. Ah....yet another 'should.' Yes. I have no problem with 'shoulds' in a particular context. Here's another one...you really shouldn't be content to watch a child being abused. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Dec 24, 2017 23:16:19 GMT
I say you're more interested in being awake than you think, or than you're letting on, 'cause my goal here is not to one up you at all, but rather, to talk about how being awake impacts the way one engages with life and what kinds of interests, fall away. yes, but you carry these assumptions about your own status, which are highly subjective. If I consider you to be self-delusional, how am I going to accept what you say about the way that not being deluded impacts life? I see no point in sitting here repeatedly saying, 'I see you as self-delusional'...because obviously you don't see yourself as that. Equally, there is no point in you repeatedly saying such things to me. It makes for pointless conversation. Far better to just stick to what can be objectively ascertained and ignore who is self-deluded and who isn't. Ah....yet another 'should.' Yes. I have no problem with 'shoulds' in a particular context. Here's another one...you really shouldn't be content to watch a child being abused. One can actually be fundamentally content, at peace, despite a general opposition to child abuse. And if you go back in the conversation, I did not initially specifically point out that I think that you, per se, were asleep, but rather, I laid out certain traits, certain interests of a particular depth, that I saw to be an indicator that one is not awake. It was you who took it personally. |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Dec 24, 2017 23:36:00 GMT
Yes. I have no problem with 'shoulds' in a particular context. Here's another one...you really shouldn't be content to watch a child being abused.
And if you go back in the conversation, I did not initially specifically point out that I think that you, per se, were asleep, but rather, I laid out certain traits, certain interests of a particular depth, that I saw to be an indicator that one is not awake. It was you who took it personally. I'm explaining that I have no problem with 'shoulds' in a particular context, for example, one shouldn't be content to watch a child being abused. Is there a difference in meaning between 'fundamentally' content and just 'content'? Also what is the meaning of the word 'general' there...what is the difference between having a 'general opposition to child abuse' and an 'opposition to child abuse'? |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Dec 25, 2017 0:09:16 GMT
I'm explaining that I have no problem with 'shoulds' in a particular context, for example, one shouldn't be content to watch a child being abused. Clearly, your 'should/should not' list extends way beyond that. Just think of all the conspiracy theory stuff and your response to it, your political views and the values behind them, your ideas about how the world can be made better....some very strong judgements there. What I was getting at with the fundamentally bit was; Peace can still abide even in the face of surface upset. And by general I was referencing holding a blanket opinion about, vs. a present moment thing where child abuse was in your face and you had to take action to oppose it. |
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969 
|
Post by Enigma on Dec 25, 2017 1:51:22 GMT
Yes....to slightly change the direction here, 'the path to hell is paved with good intentions' comes to mind. It's important to see that the idea I must 'help others' or 'make the world a better place,' is inherently selfish and as altruistic as it may seem, attachment to that idea, always has personal judgement at its helm.
what always comes to mind for me as an example, as I've witnessed the scenario a few times, is the misguided attempt to 'help' someone who appears to you to be in need, (so that you can feel better about his plight, and in the process, experience yourself as being a good person) who takes offense at your offering, because fact is, he never saw himself as being needy and now you've insulted him and made him feel like a loser.Years back, I'd signed up with world Vision as a sponsor....It had gone on a little over a year, with correspondence going back and forth, and then I'd shared with the involved family that I was expecting a baby....shortly after, I was informed by world vision that the father of the family was refusing sponsorship... They refused to tell me the exact reason why, but my sense was that these folks felt bad taking funds from a woman expecting a baby out of wedlock...or who knows, perhaps they saw me as immoral of something and didn't want to be party to such things, but nevertheless, this experience in concert with a few others, really had me looking at the dynamic of 'helping others,' and the inherent selfishness and personal judgements involved in such an endeavor. Bottom line though, I still maintain that IF an urge to help or contribute or whatever arises, and you are clear on your highest values, the path of action is always clear. Does that mean that some people actually want to suffer, consciously? Why and what for would they want to suffer, other than taking it as a just punishment for what ever they have done (or not done) as being well deserved and therefore don't suffer from seemingly suffering, but from being kept away from rightfully suffering? In other words: If one would like to commit suicide that implies, by definition, that one suffers so much that life becomes unbearable and enduring to live nevertheless is then some kind of punishment. The suffering then is wanted not unwanted. (Maybe Sisyphus was such a case. That myth that might just be created to make people who hear about him shout, "No! That's not fair! What ever that guy did, it can not have been that bad!") And helping others out of that condition isn't selfish then, but is just something one naturally does? Otherwise helping others would always contain some kind of selfishness because to lift the burden for others will also lift the burden for oneself, naturally, because of the non-dual nature? What would be considered a complete selfless act (action) or doing? What must such an act imply? And what's wrong with being selfish as a helper if it actually helps others who need that help? I don't really understand how you came to that conclusion. |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Dec 25, 2017 9:37:32 GMT
I'm explaining that I have no problem with 'shoulds' in a particular context, for example, one shouldn't be content to watch a child being abused. Clearly, your 'should/should not' list extends way beyond that. Just think of all the conspiracy theory stuff and your response to it, your political views and the values behind them, your ideas about how the world can be made better....some very strong judgements there. Sure! I am very clear clear on the context in which I will use the word 'should', but there are many many examples within that context...I just offered one. What I was getting at with the fundamentally bit was; Peace can still abide even in the face of surface upset. And by general I was referencing holding a blanket opinion about, vs. a present moment thing where child abuse was in your face and you had to take action to oppose it. Well, how about I make the language a little more explicit. Can, and should, you be ''fundamentally content'' while hearing a story on the news about a child being raped and murdered? |
|
