This little parable is Buddhist in origin or is traditionally, but it feels very “existential” to me…

Pema Chödrön, in her The Wisdom of No Escape: How to Love Yourself and Your World describes it as a story of a woman running away from tigers. She runs and runs and the tigers are getting closer and closer. When she comes to the edge of a cliff, she sees some vines there, so she climbs down and holds on to the vines. Looking down, she sees that there are tigers below her as well. She then notices that a mouse is gnawing away at the vine to which she is clinging. She also sees a beautiful little bunch of strawberries close to her, growing out of a clump of grass. She looks up and she looks down. She looks at the mouse. Then she just takes a strawberry, puts it in her mouth, and enjoys it thoroughly.

Was Buddhism possibly a kind of proto-existentialism in some general way? :chin:

Beatniks love both, if that shows anything lol. Maybe jazz music is existential too? :cool: :ok:

On the Gaza tragedy and the US election…

I have a theory that Trump’s criminally inept handling of the Covid pandemic in the USA cost him enough swing voters to lose the 2020 election.

I have a fear that if Israel keeps up its offensive, the Muslim nations surrounding it will start a ‘holy war’ against Israel.
Then as a side effect of the resulting massive bloodshed, Biden will look extremely culpable in the matter, and lose many swing voters (and thus the White House) to Trump.

This is Biden’s big test. There’s still time, but he’s waffling.
How long does it take to grow a spine? — 0 thru 9

https://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-senator-chuck-schumers-speech-israeli-elections-are-the-only-way/

At least some high-ranking politician is showing some courage.
Thank you Chuck Schumer.
That it comes from person who is Jewish and pro-Israel gives the words extra weight, I think.

I doubt Joe Biden will support this statement, primarily because he’s supporting the arsenal of Israel.
I’d love to be wrong, and see Biden show some backbone.

You rarely see war profiteers in action because they are clever rats in the darkness.
They’ll sell any weapon to anyone anytime for any reason.
But you can smell them, or at least smell the smoke from the burning cities and bodies they helped destroy.
It’s always ‘self-defense’, isn’t it? Just supplying a need, just business… so we can rest easy and let the market handle the details.

On the Gaza tragedy and the US election…

I have a theory that Trump’s criminally inept handling of the Covid pandemic in the USA cost him enough swing voters to lose the 2020 election.

I have a fear that if Israel keeps up its offensive, the Muslim nations surrounding it will start a ‘holy war’ against Israel.
Then as a side effect of the resulting massive bloodshed, Biden will look extremely culpable in the matter, and lose many swing voters (and thus the White House) to Trump.

This is Biden’s big test. There’s still time, but he’s waffling.
How long does it take to grow a spine?

Your question of whether a person rejects a 'system' or is rebelling due to personal status is important? Equally, this applies to conformity too. It is also questionable to what extent a person may able to discern their own motivations. The biggest test may be in the light of a change of circumstances and status. Will the rebel turn 'mainstream' after being given status and will the conformist stick to the norms after social downfall? — Jack Cummins

Yes. It’s completely natural and reflexive to object and squirm when put into a difficult / unfair situation.
And also understandable to work to escape those dire circumstances.

Some kind of conformity (at least outward or superficial) is necessary to survive.
We pick our battles wisely, and can become quietly subversive to help right some wrongs.
The bravest of us may not worry about becoming a martyr, but not over something trivial.

A glimpse at the big picture helps: you don’t suffer alone.
An open heart helps one see the need for ethics: you can’t save everyone, but you can help someone.
With this wisdom and compassion, one can see a glimpse of a plan against the system…
There is strength in unity and in acting that ‘we are all in this together’ because tyrants want to divide and conquer their victims; what they fear most is a unified resistance.
They want us fighting each other instead of them.

A powerful example is the two characters in The Shawshank Redemption.
Red and Andy each kept their head down, and played along with the rules.
But they were always gnawing away underneath at the Institution, which was crushing those underneath it like a huge obtuse boulder.
And importantly, they kept their humanity and didn’t become oppressive to others.
When they finally found freedom, the viewer feels the warmth and beauty of that sandy beach which washes away the cold horrors they experienced.

Insofar as "the system" determines my "status within that system" (i.e. caste) that's detrimental to me and my community, the answer is I opppse both. — 180 Proof

:up: :100:

In a way, the question could boil down to this:

Do you object to and reject the system? Or just your status within that system?

About taking ‘pure CBD’, I was curious if it could provide me enough of a buzz like the other forms of cannabis I’ve tried.

The answer is thankfully… YES, it can. — 0 thru 9

Haha… I might have to amend that somewhat premature statement.
100% pure CBD is wonderful, it reduces anxiety and stress levels while stopping pain and inflammation.
It’s great when you don’t want any giggles or spacy feelings like with THC.

But now after trying it extensively while stopping THC, I wouldn’t call it a buzz.
I’d just call it relaxation and pain reduction and enhanced mental focus.
I think before when I made the initial judgment, I still had some THC circulating.

After a week using only CBD, I felt fine… except for this odd nagging feeling that I was having difficulty really experiencing feelings, thoughts, and ideas like I did when using small doses of THC hemp oil.
I felt slightly separated from my deeper self, if that makes any sense.

After a year and a half of using it, I’d become so used to having a flow of creativity and feelings that when it slowed to a trickle, I really missed it.
So now I’m back to using just enough THC to get in the ‘zone’, along with plenty of CBD.
And that feels just about right. :smile:
(Your mileage may vary lol).

Thanks! :smile: :up:

Morality to me is objective. This means also that NO ONE decides what is necessary. A law of the universe already made that choice. Granted, this law also forces upon us all the burden of choice, free will. So mistakes will be made. Immorality will be chosen. That is all just to say, At the same time as each moral agent choosing as they must, they are also objectively wrong or right in their proximity to what is objectively good. So, all of their choices are finally only errors from which they should attempt to earn more wisdom. Yes, all beliefs are partially in error. That means all facts are as well.

So when we discuss the hard subject of necessary versus unnecessary suffering, we must be constantly reminded that there is only one right answer. Subjectivity is the delusion of experience from the immoral and imperfect state, only. The final goal is perfection, objectivity. Therefore between any two differing beliefs about what is necessary or unnecessary, only one of them is more right. That is a tautology. The central delusion of subjectivism is that all choices are equal, or that the jury is still out. The jury is not out. The verdict was cast at the dawn of time. The GOOD is objective. And genuine happiness is the consequence of alignment to the GOOD in many ways at the same time. — Chet Hawkins

Good answer, much appreciated.

I’ll link my response to my previous comment about meditation and using it to (at least partially and temporarily) behold the Good (or the Real or Ultimate Reality or whatever term one prefers).
I use the word ‘behold’ because it could include all the senses like seeing, hearing, touch simultaneously.
I wouldn’t say meditation is the only way or best way… it is just a more step-by-step procedure that is aiming for a consistent goal.

There are many other ways one could imagine where the subjective and limited mind that we all have opens to something significantly larger or deeper… into a kind of cosmic mind (words start to fail here).
This could happen when mopping the floor or walking your dog.
It could be uplifting, unsettling, ecstatic, confusing, or bring other intense feelings (which probably reflect the person having the experience).

It is a fortunate person who has had experiences where the normal veil of separation is lifted and the Real is beheld directly.
They are fortunate, but have a task to try to understand this experience and integrate it into their lives.
Trying to put it into words is another trick.

“If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man as it is, Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things thro' narrow chinks of his cavern.”

― William Blake, The Marriage of Heaven and Hell

A catchy way to put it, echoing Plato’s cave. (echo… echo… )

This would be my rough description of subjective and objective at a foundational level.

I agree. But the discipline of wisdom would require that such moral agents admit that their choice is always wrong in some way. The trick is to have two assertions at all times: 1) all my choices are partially immoral and I can do better, and 2) all my choices are relative to others' choices and between any tow of us or between me and society's net choice, only one of us is better. — Chet Hawkins

Yes, an impersonal and detached manner is helpful.
To be able to judge one’s own actions without being too soft or too harsh (like labeling oneself stupid or evil).
Equanimity is a word used to describe such a state of mind that I find helpful.

Being ignored feels worse than being misunderstood, although being ignored is more relaxing.
— 0 thru 9
Ha ha! Relaxing? If one craves being ignored or left alone, perhaps. — Chet Hawkins

Ha… maybe i should have wrote that being ignored is quieter, at least.

But in a some way I broadly divide philosophy into the ‘external social’ (written and perhaps well known) and the ‘internal personnel’ (which is the eclectic bricolage construction of one’s own philosophy).
— 0 thru 9
Stealing 'eclectic bricolage' also! ;)

I agree, but, we must not make overmuch of these 'separations', because they do not exist (really). We must therefore merge the social and the self. It is immoral not to. Humans are destined to become cells in an organism that is humanity, almost certainly. And there will still be this level and more of complexity of moral agency for each of us amid that greater 'animal'. But we need to admit to it and accept it more for it to be realized. That is my struggle here with separating the two.

Maybe this is another way to view the question of ‘esoteric vs exoteric’ philosophy as discussed in that thread? :chin:
— 0 thru 9
I just see the esoteric as that which is so unknown by society that it is considered excessive in some way. The Pragmatists would say, 'humans are not ready for that' at best. They would say much more harsh things usually about ideals they do not like, like becoming one with a hive mind. Of course some few Pragmatists are on that border and will entertain that notion as moral or desirable. — Chet Hawkins

Yes I agree!

Good point about humanity needing to (and destined to) become more interdependent on a deep mental level (or spiritual level).
We are psychologically torn in two, ripped into little bits that go flying in the air while we try to identify with some of the shreds
We are ALL of them, and more… but we are so used to being labeled and numbered, that we end up doing it to ourselves out of sheer habit.

As a cold comfort, we also tell ourselves that we are wealthy, righteous, and high-tech.
But we don’t know how wretched, poor and naked we’ve been trained to be.

In my defense:

Free from desire you see the mystery. Full of desire you see the manifestations.
[Tao Te Ching chapter 1]

Lessen selfishness and restrain desires.
[Tao Te Ching chapter 19]

Without desire there is stillness, and the world settles by itself.
[Tao Te Ching chapter 37]

There is no greater crime than desire.
[Tao Te Ching chapter 46]

I have no desire to desire, and people become like the uncarved wood by themselves.
[Tao Te Ching chapter 57]

The sage desires no desire, does not value rare treasures, learns without learning, recovers what people have left behind.
[Tao Te Ching chapter 64]

It is reasonably hard to draw another conclusion from the Tao Te Ching as I understand it. Granted, looking into the context of each of these quotes offers us mitigation advise where balance is mentioned. But in that system there is nothing clear about how to do it or why.

My model shows clearly that only anger and fear balance desire and why. I think the clarity is something I win with on that score. Further, I directly do not denigrate desire at all. I explain that the GOOD is only obtained by maximal desire. That is a rather bold denial of all of these statements by the Tao Te Ching, again as they lay here as isolated quotes mainly, but also as many people understand the work. — Chet Hawkins

Ok… good point. I could see how someone might get the idea that the TTC is condemning desire plain and simple.
I guess one way over that potential stumbling block is the context of the TTC as a whole.
There are other quotes that highlight more simple desires, like not traveling but just savoring the place you are at.
And the wish / desire to be at one with the Tao, the Way of nature and the universe.

Some other translations use the words greed, avarice, ambition, addiction along with the word desire to give a meaning of something gone too far, an apple starting to rot.

But now I see where you were getting that idea…

Here’s a website that breaks down the Tao Te Ching word by word, including the Chinese characters.

It takes physical strength to meditate, which to seek to behold Truth directly, while temporarily putting aside the discursive mind (without paying any philosophical middleman for his prepackaged thoughts and assembled ideas, to be witty about it. Even if the middleman is ourself).
— 0 thru 9
This idea is amazing and complex. I love it. I am not maybe as worried about the middleman or conduit through which I experience belief and choice. I enact new ideas faithfully as a scientific method of wisdom, until I sense unhappiness arising as a result. So false prophets and aphorisms are always 'en guard' from me for me. It's in the nature of my rigorous challenge in every way. Find the weakness as a goal. To do that, you must do the thing! — Chet Hawkins

Yes! Thanks. :up:

And you are obviously making the effort to do so and to share it with others, which is generous.
I appreciate your posts as they offer much to think about and to chew on, even when some small bits get stuck in my teeth lol.
— 0 thru 9
This statement by you is in keeping with the greatest gift one human can receive from another. That challenging wisdom was entertained, if not accepted. I can only thank you from all parts of my heart. — Chet Hawkins

Wow, thank you very much!

Yes. We agree on something. Drinks are on me! :party:
— 0 thru 9
Muckity Muck (scotch) for me. What's your poison? — Chet Hawkins

Haha… wine for sipping, weed for tripping! :yum:

So, to clarify more, I do not mean to be promoting what is normally colloquially considered to be war. Even that is better than peace in general but clearly not ideal in any sense. The trick is the definition of suffering that is wise. Suffering that is wise is necessary suffering, whereas needless pain and death, intending evil, is unwise. That may be the reason you are still loathe to accredit the overall approach. — Chet Hawkins

Yes, suffering is necessary for growth. I agree with that.

(For a seed to grow, it must surrender its individuality to become something more).
Or call it effort, work, struggle… some can see the struggle as a playful game or giant dance of life.
I’m still working on not struggling with the suffering lol.

But… when dividing suffering into ‘necessary and unnecessary’… who decides what’s necessary?

Yes, in most models the body is most closely associated with the gut, although that is not accurate entirely to my model. Even the physical manifestations of mind, nerves and the brain, are still body interfaces to mind. So they are anger instantiations that connect to fear.

Each emotion has its unique case. if you get caught up in bad metaphor land you can start making no sense very quickly. Where in the body does desire reside most closely? Is it really the heart or also the brain, the mind? The relentless drive of the pumping heart organ does seem to relate somewhat and that is the only reason you can bother with some positional questions like the heart being in the middle. — Chet Hawkins

There are of course many models and systems and philosophies.
They are like tools; if they can serve a function (such as helping us to ‘see’ the invisible or to understand the abstract by making it somewhat concrete) then they are used over and over again by many generations.

But for us seekers, it seems that the best we can do is to (try to) understand many of these systems and translate them into language that has the most meaning for us.
Each of us must explain it (by breaking down and reassembling) to the most important (and difficult) audience… our own individual self.
And you are obviously making the effort to do so and to share it with others, which is generous.
I appreciate your posts as they offer much to think about and to chew on, even when some small bits get stuck in my teeth lol.

Obviously, it can be daunting when others don’t understand or agree (or both: disagreeing exactly because they don’t understand the point being made, or the overall picture being painted).
Being ignored feels worse than being misunderstood, although being ignored is more relaxing.

But in a some way I broadly divide philosophy into the ‘external social’ (written and perhaps well known) and the ‘internal personnel’ (which is the eclectic bricolage construction of one’s own philosophy).

Maybe this is another way to view the question of ‘esoteric vs exoteric’ philosophy as discussed in that thread? :chin:

I find errors that are more pervasive in all other models including yin/yang and the chakras, just to name a few. Of course that could be considered arrogant but to be fair I had them to consider and build upon. I do not presume to be the sole contributor or influence to my model. That would be colossal ignorance.

But I can point to the errors of most other systems quite easily and I at least assert my model has less errors than they do. Of course I am not perfect and in time my model will show obvious errors to a new wave of philosophers, wisdom seekers, etc. — Chet Hawkins

But all too often the lazy denigrate anger and fast action. That is not a moral choice. Yes, anger can be just as evil as good, but anger itself is not the problem and to say it is is evil. Likewise with fear. And the message for the Buddhists is the same, no, you're wrong, desire is not equivalent to evil. There are good and evil desires. It just SEEMS like desire is evil because amid an infinity of choices only 1 direction points straight to objective moral truth, the GOOD. This gives the clueless a great path to the denigration of desire. I do not approve. The model has to work in every way. And so far I am well pleased with mine. I do wish I was better at the formulation of assertions for technical philosophy. I'd love help with that for my model, but, I assume that it can be done after the theory of it, the idea is written.
(….)
So that is a perfect example of Eastern laziness and ennui, the denigration of anger and desire. It is the delusion of peace as an affectation, a goal, an addiction, and to me and my model that is immoral. — Chet Hawkins

But having said the above comments about models, I’m very puzzled why you keep misrepresenting Buddhism or Eastern philosophies as being lame and ineffectual and missing something vital and essential.
This seems to be a common prejudice which is easily corrected with further research.

There probably have been some Eastern ideas in history that were off-base in some way, just as in the West.

The Buddha corrected any extreme otherworldly approach to wisdom, such as weakening and starving oneself in the attempt to ‘achieve enlightenment’.
It takes physical strength to meditate, which to seek to behold Truth directly, while temporarily putting aside the discursive mind (without paying any philosophical middleman for his prepackaged thoughts and assembled ideas, to be witty about it. Even if the middleman is ourself).

I don’t emphasize them often, but if we want to be more complete in our view of Eastern thought, we can remember The Art of War by Sun-Tsu and the martial arts.
Those are quite energetic enough for anyone, no?

That feels like evolution (of the mind) to me anyway…
— 0 thru 9
Evolution of the mind only would neglect the body and heart (desire). It is very very hard to be 'on the ball' with respect to wording and modeling the GOOD. — Chet Hawkins

Some things in my writing are implied by what I’ve written before. I can’t say everything all the time! :grin:

The Buddha said that we have no separate self.
When first learning this, I thought it meant something bad or nihilistic.
But it really is liberating and wonderful.
— 0 thru 9
That is what I call the unity principle, you are me and I am you. I agree. We cannot be made to unbelong to this universe so death finally is not all that terrible. The context of a valid, well body is finite. Its delusional identity is likewise finite. Everything must be recyclable, and it is. — Chet Hawkins

Yes. We agree on something. Drinks are on me! :party:

Evolutionary game theory and the cooperation strategies it reveals are based on simple, species-independent mathematics. Species that have not incorporated cooperation strategies into their biology and cultures are likely unable to form the highly cooperative societies necessary for civilizations. Therefore, we can expect virtually all civilizations, independent of species, to have incorporated cooperation strategies into their biology and cultures.

Punishment of violators is a necessary part of the evolutionary stable reciprocity strategies that are the most powerful cooperation strategies within human morality. Hence, we can also expect that virtually all civilizations will intuitively feel, as we do, that violators of cooperation strategies deserve punishment – the hallmark of human morality. — Mark S

Interesting… thanks for posting that. :up:

It’s seems that you may perhaps be describing the search for some kind of general strategy or law.
A law that might tell us what to do (and what not to do) in order to keep humanity flourishing, and do so in an environment that is relatively healthy and robust.
As you mention, the taboos and habits of individual groups can be put aside for the moment as particular (and sometimes quite peculiar) preferences.

Science has in recent years been telling us some rather disturbing facts and hypotheses about the how Earth and humans interact. (Or simply put ‘the environment’).

There isn’t always agreement, even among scientists, but there seems to be a broad consensus that human civilization is changing what was until very recently considered unchangable.
Humans, in their millennia-long attempt to make the world more habitable for humans, are very close to quickly making it less habitable.

It reminds me of someone playing poker, who is having an incredible run and amassing a huge pot… but do they know when to quit? That is, quit before losing the whole pile of cash?

There are certain ‘laws of nature’ that concern animals, their breeding, eating, and environment.
Such as the way a group of animals will increase when given access to more food, but depletion of that food source will cause a decrease in population.
And the way that animals (in general terms) kill mainly that which they eat.
(IE, despite all the gore and blood, the species are most definitely not at war with each other, trying to destroy all those around themselves. For why would they want to destroy their food source?)

A bold humanist might say that if there are any ‘laws’ or strategies that animals unconsciously or instinctually follow, then they are just that… “animal instincts”.
And being for animals, this person could boldly argue that such laws do not apply to humans.
We have power over our environment, they might argue, and an intelligence that is unbounded.

To which a skeptic might say, Yes! The intelligence of humans is so great that it can outwit all other creatures.
And we are so intelligent that we can occasionally outwit ourselves.
In this case, by accidentally (or intentionally) going against the earth which gives us life.

Not sure if that’s anywhere near what you were asking with the OP, but that’s what comes to mind. :smile:

Thanks for your insightful reply.

Technology got us this far, but strangely might block our future.
But I agree that our collective thinking can overcome tech’s downsides.

Good idea about Holism, really it’s our best hope to have the scientific disciplines working together.
Add in the total picture that Big History gives us for as a cosmic overview as possible.

Of course, there’s probably political and economic reasons that would prevent the sciences from completely trusting each other.
I guess it’ll happen when it needs to…when the tipping point tips us in action.

It’s probably my suggested cure for everything, but CBD/cannabis products show promise in treating long covid according to this article.

Also, I’d imagine cutting out sugar and white flour (and other acid-forming foods) from the diet, replacing with stevia and whole grains can help with brain fog. Probiotics and fermented foods like kombucha tea and kefir are powerful for healing.

I completely agree and I dearly love your example. I'm so stealing it! — Chet Hawkins

Thanks! I only ask that if you are interviewed by Oprah, please mention this forum lol.

Agreed. Lending great credence to the maxim, war is a constant non-delusional state. Avoiding war may be the worst thing we can do to intend morality. How about that for a confusing message to the mainstream? Instead of fleeing the struggle we need to know, to understand, that we should be leaning into it. The wise wisely inflict suffering upon everyone to allow for opportunity to earn wisdom (faster).

Suffering is the only real path to wisdom. The exception to this rule is resonance. That is to say maintaining a proper resonance with the good does take effort, which is suffering, BUT, we can say with some aplomb that ... maybe ... that is easier or done with a lighter heart than less resonance is. That means there is a perhaps dangerous temptation that develops when morality is high to slack off and rest in the wave of goodness. This again just increases the difficulty as moral agents that normally expend great effort towards the good, towards earning more wisdom, slack off amid prosperity and relax too much. — Chet Hawkins

Thanks for expanding on your terms, which helps when starting with somewhat paradoxical statements.
I’d agree more with the second paragraph, but you gotta do you! :smile:

I like the distinction I read somewhere about positive and negative kinds of stress: eustress and distress.
Eustress is a creative conflict or drive; distress is a more paralyzing or inhibiting type of pressure.

The situation you describe also underscores my continual message that peace is effectively delusional. It's the thing we aim for only indirectly, balance, balance in all ways. But what is missing from the balancing statement is the maximization statement. The GOOD is balanced and maximized fear, anger, and desire. — Chet Hawkins

Ah ha but here is the warning this otherwise great statement gets, 'What about anger and being?' That is to say you covered fear (mind) and desire (heart), but left out the anger/body part. That is dangerous. That is how we get the partial wisdom of the past.

I am rather desperately it seems often enough, trying to get people to speak and write more clearly in this matter. Granted not everyone accepts my model and even the basis of it. But I think the tripartite nature of reality is easily more defensible that the binary nature. The missing element inside the quote would be '... open mind, warm heart, and resilient body ...' I would not lightly treat ANY circumstance of saying one or two without the other. Completeness is required for accuracy in scope, at least. — Chet Hawkins

Yes, I like the three-part model of a complete human. Body, mind, and soul (or heart, spirit, feelings).
The heart being in the middle between the body and mind, mediating them, going beyond them in some undefinable way.

The model of human (and universal) energy contained in the Indian concept of the chakras is very descriptive and helpful.
I’ve been studying it for years and I still feel like a novice, but it’s clarified much for me.
The notion of the lower three chakras representing staying alive, sexual energy, and societal roles.
All of which are essential parts of life.

But as the energy builds upwards, it reaches the heart.
If the heart is closed or weak or unbalanced it throws off the entire energy, affecting the physical levels and preventing access to the higher mind (spiritual) chakras above.

This reminds me of your model of anger, desire, and fear.
Those could possibly represent the first three chakras.
The Good could be a smooth flow from the root chakra up to the crown, where the energy (ideally) spews forth like solar flares with light, understanding, and energy.

I see our tech advancing at a pace that outstrips our evolution. So we are making the mind/body connection super strong. Ensconced in metal and electric frames the resilient body part is well tended to. But, does that possibly contain an open mind or a rather closed one? We will have to see how AI goes. And the big question is, is warm heart transferable to that medium. I think it has to be. I do not think any material of the universe is not subjected to objective moral truth. That means no instantiation is without free will. Even nature locks function into form unnecessarily seemingly. But it's nature, so, the truth is, objective, that it only seems locked and is not actually locked. Infinite choice, free will, remain available within all matter. — Chet Hawkins

Well yes, the only marked issue being, is moral progress being made? In other words, is the signal of evolution being resonated with? Or are more and more immoral choices being made and evolution effectively snubbed to some degree? Is that even really possible? Can we deny the strength of the call of perfection? I doubt it. The GOOD is in many ways, inevitable. But that's faith! — Chet Hawkins

The Buddha said that we have no separate self.
When first learning this, I thought it meant something bad or nihilistic.
But it really is liberating and wonderful.

We are part of the universe at every single point of our being.
Nothing is separate, there is only the appearance of separation.
Loneliness, insignificance, and confusion can’t exist long when I imagine this infinite being that is me and everything.
You are the universal energy and mind and body.
Obi-Wan Kenobi wasn’t completely blowing smoke out his rear lol.

If someone doubts this far fetched and hippie-like description, I wouldn’t be surprised.
I’d say don’t expect too much from me… the Tao Te Ching says it all.
Just contemplate or meditate, and see what there is to see.

That feels like evolution (of the mind) to me anyway…

Sure thing. Freezing body parts are very uncomfortable.

But ya know… global warming. But rising seas make anywhere by an ocean into a SUBprime location. (If not SUBmarine).

Good luck! :flower:

Any thoughts about living in Northern Europe? Like those socialist-leaning countries such as Norway and Finland? Unfortunately, being northern equals being colder lol. :grimace:

I wonder, will the threat of missing spiritual or meta-level failure of advancement drive us to to it? Or is more incentive required? And upon whom will this motivational incentive need to be applied? The grow or die meme is relevant here. But how long will 'death' take? Is there a point of no return beyond which it is too late to proceed? I don't believe that, but, it is worth noting that at most such moral turning points in history some of the most famous quotes ring true to alignment with my warning to Pragmatism itself, 'It is better to choose to die rather than to be immoral.' "Give me liberty or give me death!' is an interesting and ironic example. It both aligns somewhat with that sentiment and yet shows the cause for being more specific with what is meant, if wisdom is truly at issue. — Chet Hawkins

Well the image that comes to mind that might describe the situation is a frog jumping from a rock to a log to another rock.
Usually, Mr Frog knows which landing spot he’s going for.
But in an emergency situation, he will jump first to evade danger, and then figure out the details of having a nice sitting surface later.

Maybe we are in a roughly similar situation.
Usually we like to advance cautiously, but when the heat is on we have to improvise and move faster than the comfort zone of our conscious mind prefers… living on instinct, intuitions, and any ‘divine’ guidance the universe cares to offer us.

Strangely enough, we have to dig deep to get out of the rut we are in.
An open mind and a warm heart are among our indispensable strengths.

What is the most elusive thing? Perfection (the GOOD) is the only right answer. Perfection literally causes desire itself. It is the source of desire. The system of love containing the one right path, the GOOD, is in its whole presentation, also that perfection. We deny it some with every failed and immoral choice we make, but, we cannot escape truth. The truth I am advocating for continues to show in the eyes of all, and in the hopes of humanity, of all the universe. — Chet Hawkins

Yes, thanks for writing that. :up:

As a general observation about such things, I would add that in my experience it is inevitable to think and talk about the ‘highest good’ and other ideals.
If we can limit ourselves just a little though, when it comes to defining those ideas down to the last word and concept, we can avoid working our minds into a corner (or into a clash with another person).

The Tao Te Ching says the highest good cannot be grasped or spoken of.
Then it seems to talk about that very thing!
Is this hypocrisy or self-contradiction?
No, I think that the TTC is ‘talking around the subject’… talking about that which needs to be talked about… but leaving the central causes and being to remain alone and mysterious.
This prevents the inevitable dogmatic disagreements that occur from overdefining that which is mysterious to us.

The rich get richer. War still happens regularly with less and less rules. People still believe in Capitalism and Democracy, immorally. Amid this chaos most fall to Hedonism and Cronyism to cope. They 'buy in' instead of mustering the will to make war on immorality. They know that their own immorality will come to be a central issue they must face if they step up. And that terrifies EVERYONE equally. So they close ranks against wisdom and the truth and put off the great fight to the next generation, letting the cup pass to their (maybe hopefully?) more worthy progeny. It's a vast unsettling hypocrisy and not likely to change easily.

But since you and I notice these eyes, and since truth is in fact truth, the struggle is indeed eternal. Nothing but the good can win, finally. Real winning is only found in alignment with the GOOD and by the degree of that alignment. — Chet Hawkins

We play our seemingly small part on the world’s stage for a relatively short time.
But each small moment in each life is infinitely intertwined with all other beings, like the jeweled net of Indra that Joseph Campbell described.
We are learning… very quickly with regards to technological advances, but ever so slowly when it comes to having a civilization that completely works.

We are standing on the shoulders of our ancestors (all of them, even monkeys, frogs and jellyfish).
And tomorrow’s children and animals will stand on our shoulders.
From a certain view, Time proceeds upwards, building on yesterday’s foundation.

The basic reason that Capitalism has not been overturned is that depending on the immoral but regulatable motivations of humans is much easier than depending on and orchestrating for the expectation of more and more moral motivations. We have to begin to realize first and implement second the kind of system as a whole that catalyzes moral behavior.

This is a sad truth. It is sad because that is exactly what Capitalism is doing so far. The incentive for 'success' is the financial reward, not the moral reward. So immorality is what is driving the system. I mean, I think we all realize how stupid and wrong it would be to let immorality drive any system. So, why does the profit motive persist? It's clearly immoral! But many people would argue that point, foolishly. So, it's a basic trouble in humanity. Admit the immorality of the profit motive or continue to fail. — Chet Hawkins

it is my aim that we, each of us, live in abundance. That means different things to different people and cultures. But some of us are far too happy with no space and jammed in like ants. How can we design allotments such that space is available in abundance for those that prefer elbow room? These are the REAL questions our societies should be asking. Along with this biggest question of all: How are the rich to be collectively 'taken down' without violent war? Good luck with that one. But it is coming. — Chet Hawkins

Thanks for your post and ideas. :up:
I admire your radical spirit (looking for and digging toward at the roots) even if I doesn’t always completely agree with some of your theories.

About abundance… I agree that new possibilities have to be explored.
Along with the necessary and obvious physical abundance, we need even more.
Something additional, on another level entirely.

People by and large seem psychologically weary, isolated, emotionally undernourished, and creatively unchallenged.
Everyone i know is trying so very hard, but their eyes tell me (even if they don’t speak) that the joy of life is feeling like an elusive thing… even when the basic needs are met.

The camaraderie, the trust, the affection, the hope, and possibilities seem like a distant memory.

Or maybe such things are just the silly illusions of childhood that are best abandoned…

I agree with and admire your emphasis on the individual and the power each person wields, perhaps often unconsciously.
Looking at history, many times one individual made a great difference… (sometimes even for the good lol).
If a person can become empty of themselves, they can be filled with wisdom, deep strength, compassion, understanding, creativity, and many other qualities.
This is compatible with the teaching of the Tao to be empty, to know and be the ‘uncarved block’.
“Empty yourself and be full, wear out and be new, twist and be straight, have little and gain, have much and get confused…”

I wish to keep that idea of the power of the individual, and add it to a study and critique of the group and civilization.
The large community and status quo takes on a life and power and energy of its own, which is fine when the society is ‘working’ for everyone relatively equally (not identically).
But in the world around us, few thinkers would take the position that circumstances are mostly fair for most of the people most of the time.

I will go out on a limb and say that this is not because humans are stupid or evil.
In the millennia of human civilization, we have learned to dominate nature and dominate each other.
This may not always lead to negative consequences for everyone, but one can imagine that a little domination goes a long way.
Too much domination leads to… well, to the present circumstances in general.

Can we learn not to saw off the branch that we are sitting on?
Can we recognize and change the unwritten rules of the civilizational game if we find that they are self-defeating?

Or do we play the game of the Owners of the world?
Those who hold onto their great power fearfully, who live in a fine mansion but are terrified because they are surrounded by the billions they are enslaving.
They spread disinformation and encourage us to fight each other, and try to find scapegoats so that we don’t recognize their lies and manipulation.

The axis of their ‘power’ is crumbling and can no longer hold, even if we wanted it to.
We see that the Emperors have no clothes, but we offer amnesty if they release the floodgates of power.

It’s people! You’re eating my people! Oh lord why?!?

:cry:

I’m quite crabby enough as it is, thank you very much.

If the oceans flood, we may have to evolve into dolphin-like creatures.
Octopus is a very intelligent being; maybe we could be friends with them.

Though I’d wouldn’t mind a tail like a spider monkey, so when I climb trees or play music I can really SWING baby! :monkey:

I see many problems with the system, but I think they do not originate from the system itself. Instead I believe they are a symptom of a deeper issue which I would tie into the Yin imbalance as I have explained it earlier.

The system is a human product, so without looking at the human flaws that create the flawed system, one cannot get to the root cause of the problems. — Tzeentch

Thanks for your reply.

I think that supposing that even if the main problems we as humanity face are not CAUSED by the ‘rulers’ and their allies (corporations, banks, governments, militaries), they are certainly AMPLIFIED by such agents.

As a whole, the system seems to be locked into a game that it can’t stop, even if willing.
(Not unlike the nuclear weapons escalations and potential global war in the past century).

The system is more machine than human; the humans are replaceable and just along for the ride.
So I guess I’m partially agreeing with you, but not taking the Rulers (or especially the system they serve) off the hook and putting them out on bail.

I’d be unfair and a bit daft not to admit the millions of good aspects of our civilization, even as it is now.
But the goodness is so inter-tangled with the bad, that it can seem like humans are fatally flawed or evil (which I don’t believe).
So intertwined are the good and bad, it is like cancer woven into a brilliant brain.
Like glass shards hiding in a garden salad.

What is the point of no return or when is a totally different approach needed with regards to our culture? (Rhetorical question, of course).

Attempts at bending flawed humans into a different shape through coercion often fail as well, which is why I believe these issues can only be solved via a voluntary philosophical transformation of the entire system - leading to my thoughts of the Yin / Water element imbalance.

The philosophical underpinnings of a civilization form the bedrock of everything, just like how all human behavior originates from the psyche.

Luckily, I believe this will eventually happen naturally, as the system threatens to implode and prompts society as a whole to reflect and come up with actual solutions.

Less luckily, things probably have to get much worse before they get better, unless this process of reflection can somehow be expediated (but I doubt it). — Tzeentch

:up:

Perhaps I wouldn’t exactly say that the philosophy FORMS the bedrock of everything, but I’d say that it AFFECTS darn near everything. (A minor quibble).

I have maybe even more than one book on that. I was wondering if there was a favorite. You speak of the original, Lao-Tzu.

To me, it feels like the trees wrote it, like the Earth itself speaking to us humans about how to live.
— 0 thru 9 — Chet Hawkins

The original Tao is very short. It’s said that it is like chess. It takes an hour to read, and a lifetime to ponder and (attempt to) master.

Here’s a website that has several versions of the Tao Te Ching next to each other for comparison.

In fact the Middle Way or Golden Mean as defined by Buddha is exactly what not to do. It's again, very Enneatype 9 only, laziness and clam over-emphasized whereas my model says conflict is good, and that includes conflict and thus balance between the three emotions. So, the much vaunted peace of the East is an immoral lie to me. You and I have already gone a bit round and round on that.

Most mythos I can take apart in this same way. There are always a number of glaring flaws in any other system I have found. They do not match reality unless we are pretending that morality is immoral in some way, subjective morality; or some inherent bent towards immorality (as right) rather than morality. It already is true that immorality (as easy or impactful) can seem like morality.

From what I understand, the Buddha said that the desire that is dangerous is the mental kind… constant wanting while believing ‘more is always better!’
— 0 thru 9
That is interesting, because more is better in many fundamental ways. But the only more that is finally better is more good. And good is objective. So more of many things is not better, if you follow. — Chet Hawkins

Another Eastern saying that you’ve probably heard:
“All the same are loss and gain, praise and blame, honor and shame…”
Maybe the word ‘blame’ is better after all since it rhymes with ‘shame’. :grin:
— 0 thru 9
And this would be another objection from me for Eastern thought. They perceive an unimaginably bad balance that does not exist. That is a balance between good and evil. No, we are aimed and we are supposed to aim at good. So there is no actual balance between good and evil. The successful navigation of being, must finally be, perfect alignment of intent with objective moral truth (the good).

If there is a balance between evil and good then choice is pointless. That makes Nihilism true and morality a farce. — Chet Hawkins

How boldly wise of you, young grasshopper, to correct the Buddha! May he return the generous favor a hundredfold! :pray: :halo: :flower:

Just kidding… I am a student of Eastern philosophy, but certainly not a master. :blush:

You seem to have some preconceptions of Eastern thought as being passive or unrealistic or something.

Forgive me if this analysis of your analysis is mistaken…
It seems to me that you are correcting the mistakes you think you are seeing with your ideas which are much closer to Buddhism than your inadvertent strawman!

I’d agree with most of your ideas… except the ones giving an accidental misreading of the East.

I mean to say that it’s not critical for you or anyone to grasp the essence of Eastern philosophy.
But for this particular thread, it is rather central.

Thanks for your interesting reply. You give much food for thought. :smile:

Thanks for your reply. :smile:

Personally I would link today's woes to a lack of philosophical and spiritual foundation (Yin / Water element imbalance), and not to economic systems.

Capitalism is ultimately nothing more than an idea of the relation between collectives and individuals, allowing for the existence of private property. That is a system that has been implicit in human civilization literally for millenia, and it has functioned more or less reasonably. — Tzeentch

Ok, there’s bound to be at least some theoretical disagreement when it comes to capitalism, socialism, etc. :nerd:

I was generalizing of course, lumping everything together and focusing on the negative aspects of what we call capitalism.
But I do so to play the role of amateur doctor, trying to see if there are illnesses and maladies that are causing pain, weakness, unhappiness, etc.
To determine if our civilization is suffering from an illness, and examine some potential cures, so to speak.
It’s a metaphor obviously, to compare civilization’s well-being to the health of a person.
But it might shed some light…

I think that there’s a profound connection between a culture’s philosophy and the resulting life one sees around oneself: all the manifestations and concrete examples of thought and intention (or perhaps human Will).

(As a personal aside, I think the reason I initially became involved in philosophy as a teen was that I wanted to know how things came to be the way they are now.
And I sought to discover the foundation of thinking that underpins our culture.
I was searching for the ‘missing manual’ of our civilization, so to speak.
Both out of curiosity, and a desire to to the best I could in life.
This thread is, I think, an outgrowth of that wondering and vague sense of unease).

I think it is debatable whether what has been going on in Western Civilization (WC) for millennia (as you wrote) can neatly be labeled as ‘capitalism’.
That seems to be an over-generalization too.
The mere existence of private property could exist in other possible systems.

Maybe there was a point in time where (what I’m calling) capitalism was highly functional, with a high level of efficiency resulting in a successful society.
But whatever word describes the general situation now (plutocracy, oligarchy, etc), the medical diagnosis of our civilization is dire.

As you eloquently noted in an earlier post:

In terms of Yang, it appears to me western society is exhausting itself. It reminds me of how the Soviet Union eventually collapsed under its own weight, because the system was simply not sustainable.

As the period of western dominance nears its end, western societies have to continually ask more of its citizens in order to stay competitive with other systems. People must produce more, and rest less.

The event horizon for this system shrinks, becoming more and more based on the short-term while sacrificing it's long-term health. Where in the past people would have been thinking about how we can create a system that will continue to work decades into the future, now people are instead worried about how we keep the system from total collapse for another year.

This, obviously, cannot last forever, and even though the system continues to try and spur people on to work harder and be more 'productive', it will reach the limit of what the people can tolerate.

We are reaching that critical point, as more and more young people are suffering burnout and related psychological problems, even though the socialist structures of many western societies actually look to the younger generations to carry the old. They are the ones who are most exposed to, lets say, 'productivity propaganda' through social media and platforms like YouTube. — Tzeentch

Concerning the above quote, I strongly agree with almost everything you said.

But I’m trying to understand why you now in this latest post seem to overlook (or exonerate? excuse?) that the total economic system that is playing a huge role in the society outside our window, and around the globe.

Would you agree that some economic changes need to be made?
Changes that limited the power of transnational corporations and banks, for instance.
Of course, this then involves governments… which are completely might be complicit in the matter.

Thoughts? :chin:

Asian philosophy to me is very Enneatype 9 in almost all ways. I find that an extremely limited point of view. Wisdom should encompass all possible teachers including a challenging 8 like me and a righteous 1 like so many teachers are. Further, Asian teachings in general express a deep and abiding mistrust of desire, which they pretty much view as the only emotion causing issues in many ways. I am not a general expert on it but I have read a lot of the widely known stuff. That's just my current take on it. If you have an Asian source you would recommend, I would be interested. It is a goal of mine to soften my language because I want to reach more people, but not so badly I will detract from the poignant nature of truth in my message. — Chet Hawkins

Thanks again for your reply. Much appreciated! :up:

About the Eastern view of desire… it’s obviously often a focal point.
Although Buddha discovered the Golden Mean, the Middle Way, and that was a giant step.
There’s some profound balance, and it’s within the grasp of everyone… not just ascetics and yogis.

From what I understand, the Buddha said that the desire that is dangerous is the mental kind… constant wanting while believing ‘more is always better!’
He described greed, hatred, and delusion as the three root poisons. (I can’t argue with that).

As for Eastern and Asian teachings that I find powerful… we already mentioned the Tao Te Ching.
To me, it feels like the trees wrote it, like the Earth itself speaking to us humans about how to live.
A relevant line:
“You can do what you want with material things, but only if you hold to the mother of things will you do it for very long…”

Choice is infinite. Done. Shown. The point is that choice is all we have and the infinite nature of choice makes blame easy. Everyone is to blame for everything. We are trapped in any state only because we lack the will, the wherewithal to change the state. But infinite choice is a guaranteed law of reality that means we are indeed to blame for any state.

Since you are me and I am you is also a truth, even if someone else caused the state you are still to blame. It makes truth easy to navigate if you believe it. Accepting blame is empowering and reaffirming in all cases. — Chet Hawkins

Yes. I agree. Choice is infinite. (Or close enough for our purposes).
I’d perhaps change your word ‘blame’ to ‘responsibility’, it’s maybe a more positive word? Anyway…

Another Eastern saying that you’ve probably heard:
“All the same are loss and gain, praise and blame, honor and shame…”
Maybe the word ‘blame’ is better after all since it rhymes with ‘shame’. :grin:

The event horizon for this system shrinks, becoming more and more based on the short-term while sacrificing it's long-term health. Where in the past people would have been thinking about how we can create a system that will continue to work decades into the future, now people are instead worried about how we keep the system from total collapse for another year.

This, obviously, cannot last forever, and even though the system continues to try and spur people on to work harder and be more 'productive', it will reach the limit of what the people can tolerate.

We are reaching that critical point, as more and more young people are suffering burnout and related psychological problems, even though the socialist structures of many western societies actually look to the younger generations to carry the old. They are the ones who are most exposed to, lets say, 'productivity propaganda' through social media and platforms like YouTube. — Tzeentch

Yes, yes and yes. Well said. :up:

To keep the lights on, too many people are forced into draining jobs where the owners see them far too often as an orange to squeeze all the juice out of, and then discard.

It’s not always just the low-paying jobs.
When I watch NFL football, and the players sustaining car crash -type violence on many plays, I wonder if the owners look at the players as replaceable parts, not human beings.
Probably no “if “ about it, and the reason is money obviously.

Imbalanced Yang state > Overexertion > Burnout > Balanced Yin state > Rest & Reflection > Renewed Yang state.

A balanced Yin would ensure that not only can people return back into society stronger and with better insight, but also would propel the system as a whole to reflect upon itself and detect the unbalanced Yang state, and repair it.

___________________________________________

This doesn't happen, because the Yin is also imbalanced. — Tzeentch

Yep. No rest for the weary warriors of the world.
It’s as though the system thrives on misery and illness, a prime example being the trillion-dollar revenue of the ‘health care’ industry.
It’s clear that industry cares most about its own health and expansion.

As we can see, it is not so easy to figure out where this cycle of imbalance starts or ends - perhaps it does neither - but a Taoist would probably first look at the Yin imbalance, since Yin is the root of all. Without the conservation of energy, there could be no action.

Therefore I would link the imbalance in western society primarily to a system of thought that has ran its course - the mechanistic world view ("man as machine"). The idolization of science has worked for a while, and now it no longer does, and must be replaced by something new - probably a synthesis of the previous science-based system with older (or new?), philosphically based systems that are more spiritual / intuitive (religious?) in nature.

My expectation is that this will be a slow and painful process, due to the degree to which this world view is rooted in every facet of our system.

Science and religion have been at each other's throat for centuries, and now we must conclude that both are needed for a balanced society, because it's becoming clear (at least to me) that a society that leans too much to either side will critically imbalance itself in one way or another. — Tzeentch

Our civilization is like the Pharaoh who refused to let Moses and his people go.
Only when it really hurt did he relent.
Do we have to be completely burned to know that fire can be dangerous?

Science and religion were competitive siblings from the start.
Add the high financial stakes that are at play now, and the result is a combination of poker and war.
The losers are the people trying to have a life.
(Do I sound a little critical of capitalism? lol)


Thanks again for the excellent post. It was worth waiting months to get.
Any further insights are indeed welcome. :smile:

Yes. Even if it were only this, that would be enough. But the fact is, if you radically alter the nature of your being, the way that you live, you can begin to see patterns of feedback from people, society, and the universe, that you did not before. To that extent, it can be 'scientific'. As I have said and will continue to say, the human mind is very limited, so to presuppose that there are not further dimensions to understanding is just poor reasoning. Evolution documents their emergence. — Pantagruel

:up: Excellent, thanks. I’d only quibble microscopically and change out ‘mind’ (as a whole) for ‘intellect’ (a part of mind, though quite useful of course).

I play devil's advocate for the esoteric — Pantagruel

Devil? Esoteric? Careful you don’t slide into… THE OCCULT!! :fire: :death: :eyes:

(just kidding :wink: )

In a very real sense, the entire progress of human understanding can be seen as the development of knowledge from esotericity to exotericity. What is evident to the eyes can be deceiving. The evident reality of illusions is dispelled by the understanding of "esoteric" perceptual mechanisms. The primitive search for animistic spirits leads to the discovery of "esoteric" concepts like atomic structure. How long did humanity search for the esoteric atom? Millenia.

Neural networks function precisely by being able to detect and utilize connections which are not trivially evident, but hidden with the complex datasets that are the representations of things. Who is really to say how many "hidden" connections actually exist in the fabric of our reality? Does the fact that we have already discovered so many mean that we should stop looking? Or that we should look even harder?

What kind of people seek out esoteric knowledge? People who have questions that exoteric (accepted) knowledge does not answer. Esoteric traditions often involve learning detailed rites and detailed normative schemas, suggesting how we ought to react and respond, to live. Who is to say those are incorrect? Freemasonry exhorts values of charity and integrity. Even if the only value of esoteric knowledge is the subjective benefit conferred by the knowledge itself...isn't that enough? — Pantagruel

:up: Yes. Thanks for that.

If someone asks “what is this knowledge you seek?”, does it ALWAYS have to be in the form of information that can be outputted from one brain into packets of words, which are fed into other brains to download exactly the ‘file’ that was in the first brain (if it is to be considered ‘worthwhile’)?

Some say yes, some say well maybe not…

What if one is trying to ‘expand one’s consciousness’? (Whatever that means to one).
Or try to experience pure awareness?
As useful as concepts are, at that point they might be a drain on the brain battery… always time for that later.
So maybe ‘knowledge’ might not be the best word? Awareness? Experience? Understanding?

Electric lights are a necessity, especially at night.
But if one wants to see the stars very clearly, you have to leave the bright city.
Searching the mind for a state deeper than the intellect is somewhat like that.

Words start to fail at these borders of consciousness.
If a skeptic thinks that is a failure, more words will not convince them that anything spiritual isn’t just fancy relaxation or entertaining fiction, at best.
But here’s some more words anyway… :grin:

:sparkle: :100: :sparkle:

Exactly the type of analysis I was looking for!
Thanks very much for posting an incisive look into our hobbling culture, like a doctor.
Or should I say, practitioner of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM).

I can’t respond in-depth at this moment, hope to reply later.

Thanks again for your thoughts! :up:

Excellent responses to my questions, comments, and critique.
(And the word ‘criticism’ sounds better in French, oui? :cool: )

I probably won’t be able to respond in-depth until tomorrow perhaps, but I appreciate the thoughtful and (very thorough) posts. :smile: :up:

But the ‘real world’ consists of a ‘given’ and a ‘possibility’, brute facts and choice.
— 0 thru 9
Oh no! The inevitable backslide to the 'we're only human' position. Nooooooo! — Chet Hawkins

What position? Sorry, I’m not sure what you mean here. Please expand on this.

I meant simply that (as a very general statement) we have possessions, talents, family, etc and there are many possibilities what to do with that ‘raw material’.

Let me emphasize the quote I gave, and how the translation of the first part is written almost as a challenge.
“CAN YOU love people and lead them without imposing your will?” etc…
— 0 thru 9
No. You cannot.

Action is required of the moral. Inaction is mere laziness the sin of anger. This is why for example enneatype 8 and 1 are more regularly thrashed and anger is denigrated than the enneatype 9 laziness and calm is. Most people would rather be around someone who patients waits for them to 'get it' than to be around those that actively challenge or instruct them to change. But most people are horribly immorally weak in that preference. — Chet Hawkins

Then I regret to say (and hope that I’m mistaken) that you reject (or possibly that you are overlooking) the teaching of the Tao, which (in this small quote) advises to be like a patient nurturing parent towards one you wish to share knowledge / wisdom with.

This is opposed to claiming some knowledge (which may be presumptuous) and forcing it upon someone (which is very authoritative and domineering).

This usually leads to a battle of wills, instead of surrounding a person with some piece of ‘truth’, but letting them open to it… or not.
You can lead a horse to water, after that it is their choice to be nourished or not.

To claim wisdom and the right to force it on someone reminds me of the extreme music teacher in the movie Whiplash, if you have seen it. (Please understand that I’m NOT saying that your words are as extreme as the teacher in that movie! Not comparing here. I’m simply against too much force in teaching or leading. Even when one is full of valuable knowledge! Especially then).

That which is loud and hot and demanding is too Yang, and will burn itself out.
Which is fine in nature, but who intentionally wants to burn out quickly? (not me, anymore).

Example: Gaslighting is unwise. But gaslighting must include immoral intent. The same attitude exists morally and is called, 'Counseling'. If one is more concerned with justifying one's actual insanity than addressing it, one will call counseling, gaslighting immorally. — Chet Hawkins

I don’t know what definition of ‘gaslighting’ you are using here, but it doesn’t have much in common with anything I’ve heard. Gaslighting is psychological abuse, not counseling.

From Webster:

gaslighting: psychological manipulation of a person usually over an extended period of time that causes the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and typically leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, uncertainty of one's emotional or mental stability, and a dependency on the perpetrator

I think you are saying that the intention defines the morality of an action?
Like murder is wrong, but killing somebody who is attempting to kill others is justified?
If so, then I’d agree in principle.

The good wisely inflict necessary suffering on the everyone as everyone is slightly unwise. Adding wise suffering is always wise, as a tautology. Excuses abound. They are only that and not wise. — Chet Hawkins

Slavery is certainly choice. The slave is choosing to be a slave. That one will really get people going. I mean, are we to remain timid on subject matter when discussing universal truths? I think not. If there is a person so possessed of rare understanding that they must needs call out dangerous and divisive truths in every situation, what is the label we properly apply to that person? Is the one-eyed man king in the land of the blind? Is she? Really? What is the probability? — Chet Hawkins

Ok. But you are making sweeping absolute statements again (like in previous posts about ‘war’).
And the meaning of them depends on some irony or insight or knowledge that I’m just not seeing being demonstrated or shown… rhetorical devices aside.

I know about ‘crazy wisdom’ being contrary and provocative while making a point.
That’s been done successfully, though it’s tricky.
But I’m not seeing the wisdom here, sorry.
These type of statements just sounds like blunt assertions with some bold attitude, which I’m not inclined to respect or even respond to further.
In my view, a ‘steamroller approach’ isn’t working, and I think you make better points elsewhere in your response.

It is tempting to think ‘we are civilized, these problems are how civilization works… exactly like it is now, there’s no going back… we are civilized, these problems are how civilization works… ”

This reasonable-sounding lullaby works well for the owners of the global Machine.
We march to their tune by day, and lull ourselves to sleep telling ourselves that there is no other way to be ‘civilized’ but the way we were taught, the way it is now (give or take some window dressing).
— 0 thru 9
This is nothing but order. Order is not the good. That conflation is tiresome to me but I realize that so many people, even Jordan Peterson sometimes, labor under its tiresome yolk. Cattle think and that's casting aspersions on some fairly independent minded bovine exemplars I and my border collie have encountered. Resistance is NEVER futile. The Borg are idiots. — Chet Hawkins

I think we actually may be agreeing here, but I might have been a little unclear in my initial wording.
I’m saying RESIST the way we are taught, with regards to the idea that the powerful must know what they are doing, and therefore are worthy of following.
To QUESTION everything, and not be lead by appearances and moved by displays of physical or financial power.

(So I’m not disagreeing with you, rather I’m disagreeing with (and trying to smash) the inner recording tape loop playing incessantly inside of my mind, though not in my mind alone).
— 0 thru 9
And that discipline is the right one, of wisdom. And the fact that you call it out is rehearsing the good, rather than the other way of excusing and thus rehearsing evil. I can only hope I do not sound condescending when I commiserate. I do the same thing. For so long I wondered, 'is this self chiding voice in me self-defeating?' Now I have lived with it long enough to cherish its insistence, in it's small, fragile, yet eternal and unrelenting voice. — Chet Hawkins

We agree again here, I think. (Feel free to disagree lol).

My statement here was like what I wrote above about “resisting and questioning”.
Question our teaching, keep what seems worthy, discard the unworthy teachings, and keep investigating that which one is still unsure of.

Any find our inner guidance, conscience, moral compass… (however one describes it).

(Oh yes… and actually FOLLOW what the conscience advises one to do. I’m still working on doing that one consistently). :smile:

Thanks for your reply…

I know, I know… the inevitable objection to such idealistic thoughts.
Thanks for not putting it in the usual way, such as “that’s not the REAL world blah blah… ”
(So I’m not disagreeing with you, rather I’m disagreeing with (and trying to smash) the inner recording tape loop playing incessantly inside of my mind, though not in my mind alone).

But the ‘real world’ consists of a ‘given’ and a ‘possibility’, brute facts and choice.

Let me emphasize the quote I gave, and how the translation of the first part is written almost as a challenge.
“CAN YOU love people and lead them without imposing your will?” etc…

It hints that there is much we do have control over.

We live a mortal life in an evolving planet, with some things we can’t change.
There will be plenty of suffering and opportunities for growth without adding to them.
(Crisis-opportunities as the Chinese say).
But we have such powers of choice built into us, even before taking into account technology.

It is tempting to think ‘we are civilized, these problems are how civilization works… exactly like it is now, there’s no going back… we are civilized, these problems are how civilization works… ”

This reasonable-sounding lullaby works well for the owners of the global Machine.
We march to their tune by day, and lull ourselves to sleep telling ourselves that there is no other way to be ‘civilized’ but the way we were taught, the way it is now (give or take some window dressing).

When starting this thread, I considered emphasizing the Tao Te Ching, but went with the possibly easier-to-grasp symbol of Yin and Yang.

But this says what I try to say so gracefully and concisely:

Can you coax your mind from its wandering
and keep to the original oneness?
Can you let your body become
supple as a newborn child's?
Can you cleanse your inner vision
until you see nothing but the light?
Can you love people and lead them
without imposing your will?
Can you deal with the most vital matters
by letting events take their course?
Can you step back from your own mind
and thus understand all things?

Giving birth and nourishing,
having without possessing,
acting with no expectations,
leading and not trying to control:
this is the supreme virtue.

Tao Te Ching, verse 10

It is like the tip of the spear, very compact, but it hints at meditation, yoga, your life’s purpose, love, and detachment.
And letting go of accumulating possessions and information.

When one wants to accept the path, the many details and tips can be looked up elsewhere.
If our civilization followed these ideas, my imagination struggles to see and can’t explain…

But I think it’d be radically different, and infinitely better.

But my caution is why I bother. If we denigrate war in general, and people also tend to denigrate anger in general, completely misunderstanding its purpose in the grand scheme of things, we also then cannot attain balance and morality and wisdom are thrown out the window. Fear side and desire side aphorisms that are anti-wisdom are then taken as wisdom and humanity all loses. It is better to understand that conflict is morally required and the wise seek out struggle and suffering to test themselves in every way. One less potato chip is war. Challenging your neighbor to stop their dog from barking endlessly is war. Doubting God is war. Posting on a philosophy site is war. Occupying space and having mass is war. — Chet Hawkins

Ok thanks for the further explanation.
I may have been unsure when you were using rhetorical devices (metaphors, analogies, hyperbole, polemic, etc) and when you were using words literally and by usual definition.
Rhetorical devices are cool, and I usually love some creativity to people’s writing, and I usually ‘get’ subtle nuances, so I’m a little disappointed in myself if I missed these subtleties.

Now I understand that you paint with a fine brush, I’ll try to read more carefully! :nerd:

That said…

“One less potato chip is war”? Hmm…
I believe our language has been devalued by lies, politics, advertising, and such.
But that may be straining the word ‘war’. But ok, you made the point.

In Arabic, jihad is usually translated as ‘struggle’, meaning the struggle and effort towards God.
Only in certain cases does it refer to actual warfare on infidels.
Not sure where I’m going with that, it just reminded me of that.

I hope to respond more later.

Thanks again for your posts and efforts! :smile:

Perhaps if you wanted to, you could start a new thread about it (war, morality, etc). That could be interesting. I’d definitely follow it, and probably participate. — 0 thru 9

@Chet Hawkins

And actually by coincidence of timing, this might be a good time for someone to start a philosophical thread about war, since the specific threads about Ukraine, Gaza, etc are now in the Lounge.

Just an idea… :chin:

That would simply lead to the current imbalance. This is why Jung talks about embracing your "shadow." To help with maintaining personal equilibrium. — Vaskane

:up: Thanks. Yes, I’d agree with that.

Jung’s concept of anima and animus (the female and male within everyone, in a nutshell) has been around a long time. But it’s still quite radical.

And the far-Right conservatives would probably wish to ban and burn it. Which is not surprising, but is rather depressing. It’s like they are stuck in the movie Pleasantville.

Brenee Brown also has some excellent ideas that I found useful for myself across the corpus of her work. — Vaskane

I’ll look into those books. Thanks!

I would stay away from equating Yin to the feminine, and Yang to the masculine. It's understandable that one would be tempted into doing so, but I think this "man vs. woman" dichotomy is a symptom of western pathologies and not necessarily relevant for the concept of Yin-Yang.

In Taoist thought, both are critical components of every facet of life.


Yang represents creation and action, Yin represents rest and renewal. One cannot exist without the other and vice versa.

Out of balance Yang exhausts itself, and out of balance Yin becomes stagnant.


A solid argument can be made to the effect that our society is critically out of balance in terms of Yang, and is indeed exhausting itself. One clear indication of this is the increasing rates at which young people suffer burnouts and psychological problems.


However, just because it is imbalanced in terms of Yang, does not mean that there cannot be Yin imbalance too.

For example, I have seen the emotion of fear being mentioned here a couple of times as being overly present in our civilization. Roughly speaking, I think this is true. Consider the copious amounts of "fear porn" in the media, increases in anxiety-related disorders, etc.

In the Chinese Five Elements (Wuxing) fear is the emotion most closely related with the element Water, which is considered the most Yin of all elements, coming forth from the element of Metal, which is also a Yin element.


Yin-yang and Wuxing are cycles, not two-sided scales. Imbalances in one element can create, perpetuate or strengthen imbalances in the other. Everything is in communication and constant flux.


I just wanted to pull some things apart here, since it seems to me the thread is leaning towards a faulty interpretation of Yin-yang and related concepts, as it attempts to reinforce the western male/female dichotomy. — Tzeentch

Thanks very much for your response. That puts the thread into a fuller context of the origins of the Yin-Yang idea.

I definitely do not want to “reinforce the western male/female dichotomy”! Quite the opposite.

Thanks again. :smile: :up:

Thanks for your elaborations. That helps a little understanding your thinking. I still disagree, but I’m going to withhold going any further with the general ‘war’ topic here and now.

It is definitely a ripe topic, and I’ll admit I haven’t heard anything exactly like your position before.

Perhaps if you wanted to, you could start a new thread about it (war, morality, etc). That could be interesting. I’d definitely follow it, and probably participate. And I’d be curious about the general response from others. You don’t seem like you are rattled by disagreement, and that is a noble quality. It’s difficult sometimes not to take disagreement as an attack on one’s core beliefs, sending one into ‘attack mode’. I admire that you can remain polite under stress.

Anyway, thanks and carry on! :flower: :victory:

Thanks for your reply! :smile:

Yes, that’s an excellent point… it interacts differently with each person. Even for me, CBD with a little THC won’t be exactly the same every time. I’m learning to accept that. I think it does what it needs to.

Sometimes there’s a flood of feelings that are very intense, almost like waking from an emotional dream. It can be unpleasant, but now I call it ‘cathartic’ and that helps. The feelings had to come out. I’m like most guys… a little emotionally constipated lol. Cannabis opens the doors to my own mind and heart. I don’t know how, but it does its thing and makes me a better person. :sparkle:

Our? As in human civilisation? Perhaps Danish civilisation is balanced, being free and developed. But the world in a broad sense surely is not. — Lionino

Thanks. Yes, civilization as a whole…
But any pockets of sanity in a sea of upheaval is definitely a good thing, like an oasis in the desert.

Mmmm… cheese danish… :yum:

Thanks for your reply. Most appreciated. I hope to respond more fully later. :smile:

To wax philosophical about cannabis…

I’m surely not the first to say so, but I think we are trained and encouraged to consume as much as possible.

From another recent thread, I wrote:

The opposite (but reinforcing) civilization trend is murkier to describe, but I’d say it is a bias against simplicity, sharing, not consuming, and well… against happiness itself.
Happy people are satisfied in a deep way, and will probably not feel the need to buy things and consume mass quantities.
A person who is afraid, in pain, confused, competitive, envious, anxious etc is an ideal consumer.

If one were to see many ‘strangers’ going around lovingly and unselfconsciously hugging one another, and asking if they are feeling well, that would be a sign that something in our culture has dramatically changed.
The fact that that statement sounds humorous shows how ingrained these habits are, even in those who are trying to see beyond them.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/880208

So each of us from waking consciousness as a child probably finds themselves as vaguely lonely and feeling like an outsider, at least some of the time.
Those happy times and feelings are held onto, almost desperately, if the stress and confusion seem to keep increasing.
If your parents are divorcing, and the bullies find you an easy target, and you can’t afford nice clothes…
It’s easy to seek something to feel better… something trusted and good, and available.

Let’s say it’s food, sweets, pizza, and such…
So you eat some of that and you feel better. You eat more and feel relief.
You eat even more and you wonder if you’ve overdone it, since you are gaining weight and don’t feel so healthy.
Your blood sugar levels go up and down erratically, making you feel lethargic and moody.
Maybe something else will help?

You maybe think that some alcohol will do the trick…
(You can probably see where this is heading… )

OK smartypants… how would cannabis be any better or different than those things mentioned above?

Well… what if cannabis (either CBD alone, or in combination with some THC) could possibly help someone simply feel good to be alive?
To alleviate the anxiety for a few hours?
To hear the birds chirping as though you’re hearing it for the first time as a child?

What if it just a pinch of that odd little plant from outer space helps you not so much
escape reality, as accept reality?

What if?
What then?
:chin: