Slavery - Mastery

[Bamboo]

I was looking through some of my old log entries and found this, it was a concept I've toyed around with for a while:

The perspective is this: you are a slave to your environment. To the needs around you. You exist to serve these needs, internal and external, and balance them as you see fit. You work because the needs exist, and you fufill them.

Do not concern yourself so much with titles or supposed mastery - the needs will always be bigger than you, more than you can ever take on. But be a good servant - attentive, focused, compentent. Do not serve indiscriminately. Choose the needs, internal and external, that should take precedence. If skills must be learned, you become a slave to learning that skill.

You will fail. Be humble and honest, make ammends , try again, or back away.

Choose to be a slave because you understand that all choices to bring a goal to completion require you to give up your freedom to do something else. This cost is inherent. It must be paid, there is no choice in this, only in what goal to serve.

You are enslaved to yourself. You are attached to your body and you have no other. Serve it well, choose to serve the needs which will maintain its abilities and allow it to gain new ones. This is a difficult task, do not take it lightly.

Do not be paralyzed with indecision on how to serve. It is best that you serve, rather than be adrift for too long. The sum of the needs will always be more than you can take on. Choose, and serve well.

Allow others to serve you.

Accept responsibilty. The better you serve, the more difficult the task you take on, the more others will entrust you - the more you will trust you. Be wary of taking on more than you can do, but accept that pushing your known limits will be a necesity. There will be failures, this is inherent, accept it outright. There will be sucess, this is also, in all likelyhood, inherent. As you improve, this too, accept.

Serve well.

I decided to write out the "other side."

The perspective is this: you are the master of your environment. You exert your will and the world bends to conform to you. Without your perception and ambition, the environment around you would have no meaning, it could not be crafted into anything - it would be irrelevant, meaningless. Purpose eminates from your will and desire.

As you observe your environment, you see what it can become. All around you potential is crafted out of raw material and visions of what can be. And from this, and your own action, things change. That change comes from your hands - your imposition into reality to say "I want it to be this way."

You are the driver. You choose your focus, you choose to perform. In spite of uncertainty, it is your continued concentration which makes or breaks outcomes.

Choose mastery because your will is automatic. You cannot not exert your will onto the world - in every moment you are engaged in creating a vision. Know what you want realized.

Prioritize your willpower. What is most important to create? If you need helpers, get them - inspire them with your desires and have them work for you. Craft your desires carefully so they will choose to realize your own - compell them into action. Your leadership will bind them to the goal and give their world shape and purpose.

Struggles in leadership will be inherent. Others will craft their own visions which will compete with your own - by triumph of will yours may be realized. You will create impossible visions - search for weakness in the obstacles you encounter and a more possible vision will come. Surround yourself with those who want mastery of their craft. Learn about the visions they create so yours can be potent.

See the best of what can be and create it.

Thoughts? I see them as two sides of the same coin. Do you identify with one more than the other?

Or however you want to react, I'll hold off on my own thoughts for a bit.

 

[Mole]

It is sobering to realise that slaves and masters were a normal part of human life until institutional slavery was first abolished by the House of Commons in 1833.

So it is not surprising that the master slave relationship comes trippingly off the tongue.

 

[KDude]

The first one made me stabby... if that answers your question.

 

[Bamboo]

Thoughts? I see them as two sides of the same coin. Do you identify with one more than the other?

Since I wrote both based on aspects of my own personality, I obviously identify with both. The master comes up with the ideas in the first place - gives direction. Without which the slave couldn't go anywhere. The master gets the credit. He's the face of the operation. He's also a bit of an arrogant twit with his head in the clouds. The slave actually has to deal with the problems on a direct basis - the slave is more tempered, more patient, and more capable. The slave has a better concept of how things actually work. The slave is also a bit of a dull edge - when in doubt - work harder, or don't work at all. Not the best strategy.

Both deal with leadership in different ways. The master is the more "obvious" leader. The face of the operation, I've said that. He gives directives. The slave is just as much a leader - but it's through competency he gains greater responsibility, rather than some airy declarations.

 

[Lark]

Employing the golden mean I would have to say that each are relatively true, I also believe in Kant's categorical imperative that we should act as though we are free and respect self-determination no matter how obvious it is that we are subjects of determinism.

I reality I'm a soft determinist, I do believe that there are lots of things which are innate, then environment does exercise an influence after that which can be further determining, although none of those things can rob you entirely of free will, whatever dispositions, influences or instincts someone has they can still exercise a choice. Perhaps it is more predictable the choices they will make and, sometimes, the requisit responses then from others or the authorities but they are still making free choices.

I'm opposed to servility and often when people are quick to criticise servility to authorities or bosses of any stripe they are slow to realise how servile they are to their own base nature and that this could potentially be why they are in conflict with others in the first place. That could be as simple a thing as their arousal-relaxation responses causing anger and hostility or if they can handle temptation.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

It is sobering to realise that slaves and masters were a normal part of human life until institutional slavery was first abolished by the House of Commons in 1833.

So it is not surprising that the master slave relationship comes trippingly off the tongue.

Oh, Victor.

And there it is.

 

[Bamboo]

It is sobering to realise that slaves and masters were a normal part of human life until institutional slavery was first abolished by the House of Commons in 1833.

So it is not surprising that the master slave relationship comes trippingly off the tongue.

Oh, Victor.

And there it is.

Now now, he has a perfectly acceptable point - slavery remains a part of our cultural awareness and is an institution which still exists in some realms. Slavery has shaped our world. It makes sense that it would come to mind as a dichotomy.

Well, actually, only the concept of slavery came to me at first - being bound to obligations, having no choice in the matter - this made me think 'slave.' And I suppose I didn't have to form a dichotomy between slave and master - perhaps slaves and free men, or a dichotomy at all, but master seemed most appropriate.

The first one made me stabby... if that answers your question.

I don't know what this means.

Employing the golden mean I would have to say that each are relatively true, I also believe in Kant's categorical imperative that we should act as though we are free and respect self-determination no matter how obvious it is that we are subjects of determinism.

I reality I'm a soft determinist, I do believe that there are lots of things which are innate, then environment does exercise an influence after that which can be further determining, although none of those things can rob you entirely of free will, whatever dispositions, influences or instincts someone has they can still exercise a choice. Perhaps it is more predictable the choices they will make and, sometimes, the requisit responses then from others or the authorities but they are still making free choices.

I'm opposed to servility and often when people are quick to criticise servility to authorities or bosses of any stripe they are slow to realise how servile they are to their own base nature and that this could potentially be why they are in conflict with others in the first place. That could be as simple a thing as their arousal-relaxation responses causing anger and hostility or if they can handle temptation.

It's not entirely obvious to me if I have free will or not. There is likely many things that happen that I cannot see or understand due to human limitations.

I understand a lot of people react negatively to the thought of being a servant - but any choice made - if there is choice - comes at the expense of other freedoms (potentially an infinite number of other freedoms). And while base desires are a large part of what needs to be addressed, the most successful individuals, people most in control of their paths (or leaders of the paths of many people) are slaves as well. To routine, to training, to their discipline, to the choices that THEY choose.

 

[KDude]

I don't know what this means..

Stabby.. as in, aggravated, wanting to lash out and kill random people.


Seriously though, it was just simply unappealing, that's all. I'm not quite the latter either though. If I read more of the subtext, the first isn't so bad. It just brings up tendencies that have never come naturally to me. I see some of it as merely necessary. Being needed is not fulfilling for me. I like to shake a lot of that pressure off, if I can get away with it. I'm with you on social contracts and shit.. but not willing service/duty/what have you. Whether I'm bullshitting myself on whether I'm truly a slave in the big picture is irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned, I'm not.

Nor do I "enslave" myself into learning skills. I don't see the necessity.. at least not so far. I learn a little here and there, and have more of a "good enough" mentality, I guess. Sometimes I make shortcuts to get the same result to certain problems.. I don't need to master something to accomplish an ends. Or sometimes I go with what's fun or sensible at the moment. I learn best if I'm just infatuated, with what I find personally fun or appealing. I improve skills over time through more emergent factors. Not through any specific goal to learn.

 

[Bamboo]

Stabby.. as in, aggravated, wanting to lash out and kill random people.


Seriously though, it was just simply unappealing, that's all. I'm not quite the latter either though. If I read more of the subtext, the first isn't so bad. It just brings up tendencies that have never come naturally to me. I see some of it as merely necessary. Being needed is not fulfilling for me. I like to shake a lot of that pressure off, if I can get away with it. I'm with you on social contracts and shit.. but not willing service/duty/what have you. Whether I'm bullshitting myself on whether I'm truly a slave in the big picture is irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned, I'm not.

Nor do I "enslave" myself into learning skills. I don't see the necessity.. at least not so far. I learn a little here and there, and have more of a "good enough" mentality, I guess. Sometimes I make shortcuts to get the same result to certain problems.. I don't need to master something to accomplish an ends. Or sometimes I go with what's fun or sensible at the moment. I learn best if I'm just infatuated, with what I find personally fun or appealing. I improve skills over time through more emergent factors. Not through any specific goal to learn.

Umm. Don't stab people.

I don't think you're taking the right way. It's more of a quiet acceptance that things are bigger than just your immediate wants, and that if you want to do anything - and if you have interest in doing it well (or getting things that require effort), you have to make choices which will limit your freedom, but ultimately expand your reach.

Moreso, it's not so much about being needed, rather, people need/want things - if you are able to figure out what these things are and get them what they want, you will be entrusted with greater responsibility, but also greater reward. The same applies to things you want for yourself - you have needs and desires which you might want to pursue for your own fulfillment*. To some extent you can pick the path of simply ignoring those desires, but that's not very sporting. It depends what you want and how much you want it.

You gotta pay the cost to be the boss. If you want to secure your freedom, you need to do the securing first. I'm a slave to my need for freedom - but largely because the masterful part of myself said "get that." Odd, eh?

*You learn from economics that not only do you have desires, but you have infinite desires (demand) with only a limited capacity of time, energy, and ability to pursue them.

 

[KDude]

You gotta pay the cost to be the boss.

I understand your point, but it's assuming I even want to be the boss. So far, the idea hasn't appealed to me. Sounds like more trouble than it's worth.

I only want to be the boss of my own life -- within reason.. I used to be a lot more immature in what that meant. Like I said, I respect a "social contract". If I can direct my life without stepping on too many toes, then I'm cool. I have little need to add on to it or be "entrusted" with too many things outside myself. As for the immaturity, there was a time when I didn't even embrace a basic social contract much. I stole a lot (even from family and friends) and forced my way into getting what I wanted. I know these sort of things are not cool, but point being, it goes pretty far back. There was something about it that was natural to me. So that's all I mean in saying that the first option (slavery) doesn't immediately appeal. If anything, it's something I've accepted a little.

 

[skylights]

the first reminds me of when i was first learning about islam... which means "submission". there are many parallels between that viewpoint of the religion and your first paragraph.

and yes, the same coin. i think that all things are reciprocal relationships and work best when there is balance and equality in give and take. sometimes it is better to be slave and sometimes to be master. and more often, neither, or both. if we are aware of both sides and both give where we can and take when we need, we can create positive synergy. i believe the universe is structured such that we are all meant to be a part of one Wholeness and we work best when together, each playing our own individual part in the great dance of life. this is true in all relationships, i think. we give of ourselves what we can and we get back when we cannot give. we were once stardust and will return to being stardust: we will play all roles and hence can never truly choose a single part to play. there is a certain magic to it.