• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Expectations and sense of deficiency as the cause of pain

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I haven't tried to explain it to you in particular before. Just countless other people, and 99% of the time, it fails.

It's not an Ni thing. Words are simply not adequate.

Let's take what you asked earlier for example:

Will you be happy? I cannot tell you that.

There is no "Do x, don't do y, and get z result" because by consciously trying to do something in this manner, you change the outcome. I cannot say "do this and you will be happy" because if you are looking for 'happy', in a result oriented fashion from my precise words, you may in fact cause yourself to lose it.

I see that you are reading all kinds of things from The Bible to philosophy but these things are traps. If a book could tell you what you need by its words alone, someone would have found it by now.

You need more than words. You need lived experience. I think this is why westerners continually fail at eastern philosophy.
I think I might have an inkling of what you might be trying to say. Yes; can't really put it into words.
I guess, it's just a 'knack' that comes, or something like that.

Part of this topic is from me growing really tired of all these formulations Westerns put out. Everything is a "formula", basically. The formula for success, the formula for happiness, the formula for being "right with God", etc., and it just becomes something to brag on and put down others who haven't mastered it (like among many Christians, it's what they call "victory", and it's not even what victory originally mean in scripture; it's basically having a good attitude toward life, and making this exclusive to Christians through "the power of God", and anyone who doesn't have that good attitude is probably not "sanctified", or whatever). Yet, it's as I said, a formula, and one that sells to the masses; and it's always made to sound simpler and more easy than it really is.
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
[MENTION=3521]Eric B[/MENTION] "So in this view, I imagine roses always had thorns, but it was our experience of them as "painful" that fulfilled the curse of Gen. 3:16-19? But the thorns were still in themselves created "good", and it is only man who began seeing them as evil, because they were inconvenient to us, and we had this need to master creation (which was instilled by God, but became corrupted with "good and evil" knowledge, so that we then were tying to fill a sense of fear and deficiency in ourselves)" <---this is pretty much my belief about life. The only thing I would change is that I'm not really at a personal level with God, I have always taken that saying "Man was made in the image of God" literally and took that as meaning, we all have a piece of God or are God and one collective soul...obviously still not decided on that yet...but either way they both lead to us all being connected and they both lead us to being creators. So it is our perception of things. I literally talk myself down from anger issues I have with people...which is from the pain they've caused me because something didn't go my way or what not, so an expectation. All I have to say is that these people are doing the best they can at this given moment, and I truly believe that more and more and just "accept" they're on a different path or at a different spot on the path. All that being said I have not have time to read all of the posts to this WONDERFUL thread ha ha cause i'm at my friend's house...so I am not sure if i'm repeating anything or not. Either way you should read/watch anything with Bruce Lipton he talks about epi-genetics and read the book called Frequency the power of personal vibration. Or maybe even Dr. Wayne Dyer...although he has more of a religious point of view...which I don't know if that's what you're looking for. Great post btw! I totally have had the same problems with expectations and wanted to solve the problems that arise from them. I learned about the law of attraction and it really has changed my life, it's how we create our future. Anyways I am having a hard time letting go of things, and always have but now i believe i have had actual physical pain because of this so each day i'm more motivated to let go...it's very difficult :( even with all these tools, i hate being a J right now in this time of my life.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"Law of attraction" (Wikipedia):
For example, if a person opened an envelope expecting to see a bill, then according to the law of attraction, the envelope would "confirm" those thoughts and contain a bill when opened. A person who decided to instead expect a cheque might, under the same law, find a cheque instead of a bill.

The problem I have with that, is that it is just creating more expectations that are almost guaranteed to fail (at least half the time), and what's in the envelope is already there, regardless of what you choose to believe about it. It's basically a kind of gamble or game of chance. This is exactly the problem I've been having with expressions of Christianity, where you're supposed to have "faith" in some sort of outcome, and when it doesn't work out, you must either blame yourself ("didn't have enough faith"), or God is "testing" you, or conclude you just don't know what God is doing.
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
I think I might have an inkling of what you might be trying to say. Yes; can't really put it into words.
I guess, it's just a 'knack' that comes, or something like that.

Part of this topic is from me growing really tired of all these formulations Westerns put out. Everything is a "formula", basically. The formula for success, the formula for happiness, the formula for being "right with God", etc., and it just becomes something to brag on and put down others who haven't mastered it (like among many Christians, it's what they call "victory", and it's not even what victory originally mean in scripture; it's basically having a good attitude toward life, and making this exclusive to Christians through "the power of God", and anyone who doesn't have that good attitude is probably not "sanctified", or whatever). Yet, it's as I said, a formula, and one that sells to the masses; and it's always made to sound simpler and more easy than it really is.

Yeah it sounds like you can see it. Formulations are a big part of the problem.

People are always trying to do and become through impersonal, one size fits all instructions. But one size does not fit all. One size doesn't even always fit one.

Even Zen Buddhists saw this happening in Buddhism - people were getting too caught up in the words and scriptures and were losing it. So they came up with Zazen, and koan solving.

A koan is a question or short story with a typically paradoxical answer or meaning that one arrives at through lateral thinking. A master issues a koan to the student and expects an actual response - not the 'correct' response, but the response that shows insight. It's looking for a direct realization that goes beyond standard rational thinking.

It basically breaks this formulaic tendency for people to rely on words and premade answers.
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"Law of attraction" (Wikipedia):
For example, if a person opened an envelope expecting to see a bill, then according to the law of attraction, the envelope would "confirm" those thoughts and contain a bill when opened. A person who decided to instead expect a cheque might, under the same law, find a cheque instead of a bill.

The problem I have with that, is that it is just creating more expectations that are almost guaranteed to fail (at least half the time), and what's in the envelope is already there, regardless of what you choose to believe about it. It's basically a kind of gamble or game of chance. This is exactly the problem I've been having with expressions of Christianity, where you're supposed to have "faith" in some sort of outcome, and when it doesn't work out, you must either blame yourself ("didn't have enough faith"), or God is "testing" you, or conclude you just don't know what God is doing.

I am not disagreeing with you on what you're saying.

I feel like I need to put out a disclosure of some sort...I just don't want to offend anyone I guess.

I just beleive that there is information that goes further into the law of attraction that you need to know to understand how it actually works...in no way am i trying to "convert" you or what not...but I will explain my understandings of it.

-If you just think a simple thought in the positive present tense and write it down...first it will raise your chances of having it happen. But you're right...at least 50% of the time it doesn't mean anything happens
-The real problem is that our values, feelings, beliefs etc...are held in our subconcious.
-our concious mind is out dealing with 'problem solving' most of the time.
-underneath though there are a lot of deep seeded beliefs that are there controling us...and then we usually have very unconcious behaviors that result from them

That being said. The only way to really fully be in control of what you attract, is having a good amount of "feeling, belief, value, etc." about said person/place/or thing.

If you don't ACTUALLY BELIEVE you'll get a check in the mail...you wont.

Now...that being said...what also plays into this is...if you focus on the bills...if you say, "I don't want bills" you're putting energy into the bills..."energy flows where the attention goes"
So the reason people have such a hard time with this is becuase you have to rewrite all your negative thoughts and then actually believe the positive...which would mean re-programming your subconcious mind.

That's why if you read/watch anything with Bruce Lipton, he goes into the bit about the subconcious mind, If you've ever watched the movie "The Secret" they go into the need to have feelings behing what you're thinking. And that book about Frequency goes into letting go.

But anyways that's just my opinion.
 
W

WhoCares

Guest
To simplify things for myself as I went through my own MLC, I came to realise that life (other people, events, circumstances, anything not me basically) is like the ocean. It does what it will and I am without influence to change it's ebb and flow. I can choose however to learn to surf or I can continue to be dumped by the waves. Surfing doesn't guarantee I'll never get dumped, but it does mean I have the ability to ride the highs and lows to the best of my ability which is better than getting smashed continually.

As little children we are taught that if we scream loud enough someone will come and fix things for us. As adults, we have to let go of that notion and realise that some things will need to be accepted and weathered despite our best efforts to create a life worth living.

Re: Law Of Attraction, I'm a believer but....

The Secret was quite possibly the worst representation of that I have ever encountered. It gave a very false idea that if you just send out mind waves about something it would completely fall into your lap. Anyone who's ever bought a lottery ticket will tell you, it doesn't work like that.

LOA works more like gravity. It's an ever present tendency for like to attract like AND it responds to your dominant vibration (or signal). We all want lots of stuff, we all wnat it with loads of intent and yearning too. But we're all basically really busy being pissy with life about one thing or another. So even though our desire might be gigantic the reality is that we are existing in a vibration (signal) of pissiness so our big dream is unlikely to become our reality by LOA. You cannot get what you are not a match to quite simply.

I have intended quite a lot of things deliberately into my life using principles of LOA. Many of them I have gotten, none of them ever materialised out of thin air though. The practical side of it was that my desire and subsequent match to it set off a chain of events which eventually saw me get what I wanted. Some would say that's not LOA it's you being focused, it's coincidence it's luck. I would agree with all of those statements. I don't see LOA as a magcial genie waiting to grant my wishes. It's a natural force like gravity that you learn to leverage or not for creating desirable outcomes in life.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
From those statements, it looks like it is a combination of becoming more attuned to what is more likely to happen (e.g. lowering the expectations connected to the "pissy" attitude) and "meeting it halfway" by one's own effort (and I guess, when it involves other people, which is a lot of the time, it can also include "vibes" you send off).
Would you say that sums it up?

Would you also say this suits an Ni perspective? (since both of you happen to be NTJ's, and this sounds sort of like something an Ni user would talk about).
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
From those statements, it looks like it is a combination of becoming more attuned to what is more likely to happen (e.g. lowering the expectations connected to the "pissy" attitude) and "meeting it halfway" by one's own effort (and I guess, when it involves other people, which is a lot of the time, it can also include "vibes" you send off).
Would you say that sums it up?

Would you also say this suits an Ni perspective? (since both of you happen to be NTJ's, and this sounds sort of like something an Ni user would talk about).

I'm not sure about the part about becoming attuned to what's likely to happen, that sounds like the gateway to lowering expectations...When you're talking about vibrations...we are always sending them off, everything and everyone all the time. So with the LOA if you're sending off the vibe/frequency that you're not getting what you want...like attracts like...you don't get what you want...so you have to accept what's coming. not predict/hope. just accept and be grateful for what you already have...and let the "bad times/vibes" pass....like what Who Cares was talking about similar to riding a wave...all waves pass...just let them...and while they are passing...be happy so that you attract more happy.

For me it's all about reconnecting with the soul/source. whatever that may be. A higher power that I believe we are all a part of...I don't believe we're seperate from "God" <---I don't know if I agree with that term though because of all the pre-concieved notions about it.

Anyways, I think thinking about all this stuff and believing in it, is totally my Ni talking, most of the things I read about LOA and stuff like that ...I don't have to try very hard to manifest things from it. It really interests me this topic...I get so excited about it...because I feel like it connects MBTI to my ideaology and everything, so it's awesome. Anyways the hard part for me is the letting go, the judger in me is like all or nothing and very adament about not giving up control. And then the Se comes into play by sort of "riding the wave" just appreciating the perception sort of...kinda a bad description...lol But that's why it's so hard for me ha ha. Becuase it's hard for me to stay in the moment all the time and remember to just be happy at every moment so that I can attract happy...that was something I really liked when learning about the LOA, that the past didn't matter. Only the present can attrace the future...and everything that you did iin your past led you to where you were today...so for me it's very inspiring because I think about the future a lot, and want that to be better than the present or past and ...LOA pretty much says to me what happened in the past is who we used to be... and we can start over anytime we want.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"Vibes" only seem to make sense with people (or possibly animals as well). People can pick up vibes. So if as a young guy, you're too "needy" to have a girl (which will be expressed by the negative thinking of not having what you want), that will send off a vibe, that the girl picks up as a possible negative trait, and for some reason (possibly not even conscious) turn away. Similar dynamic with employers. If you're more confident like you don't "need" this; you have an abundance you're there to "give" of, then you'll look better to whoever you're pursuing. (Seems to be set up that "those who [already] got shall get, those who've not shall lose...", and maybe that's some kind of natural selection principle or something).

But I don't see how this would work for something impersonal like a bill or check in an envelope that the sender probably is not even aware of your positive or negative attitude in life.


Other thoughts,
It seems the world is geared to place burdens on individuals, and excuse systems.
In systems, people can just pass the buck to other individuals, esp those with more power and influence, and therefore it's harder then to pin down responsibility on anyone. Other systems can challenge systems (e. g. Conservative “angry taxpayers” against the “liberal government”) and have a better chance of having some influence, (yet often, just end up stalemated).

I see my problem is I have always been “out there” as basically trying to be a one-man system going against all others.
I have never been able to get over the “hump” of acceptance by a group (which often involves some sort of qualification), and then the bending of the will to become fully apart of it.
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
[MENTION=3521]Eric B[/MENTION] hmm, I often think about a similar subject...not sure if it relates but I'm trying to understand what you mean exactly. So when thoughts come to me like "I am not accepted by these people" or something...like at work or even a group of friends...my next thought is crap I need new people in my life that are kool or what not...then I start to say how can it be all the "other" people...if im the only one not fitting in...then I start to blame it on myself instead of the group...and then i practice LOA and other things...I have found that people i hate leave the country...two people have done that...I personally believe everything happens for a reason...so I believe it's working for me...if it doesn't work though I come to the conclusion that I just have not met the right people...and that's what it sounds like the problem may be if you dont want to bend to fit, then you need to find people that are willing to accept you and that you're willing to accept...which would mean they would have to be mature...it's hard to find actually. I also try to think to myself that my friends either have an unconditional love towards me or they don't...I can usually "feel" this out. And I know my boundaries then. I also reciprocate this to them(unconditional love). In any relationship though, it's good to know where the boundaries are...like someone can do something really shitty to me and I will immediately forgive and be happy if they say...but I did this or am doing this to make up for it...that to me allows my expectations to fall but then come back up, realizing that they are just human, and they're only doing the best they can at that given time...and I usually appreciate their intentions and find that they do actually have a heart...In reality I have not once met someone that has said "Let me do this to make up for what I did, I'm sorry" usually just get a sorry...so good luck with that lol... Am I, at all, touching on what you're saying? lol
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
[MENTION=3521]Eric B[/MENTION] hmm, I often think about a similar subject...not sure if it relates but I'm trying to understand what you mean exactly. So when thoughts come to me like "I am not accepted by these people" or something...like at work or even a group of friends...my next thought is crap I need new people in my life that are kool or what not...then I start to say how can it be all the "other" people...if im the only one not fitting in...then I start to blame it on myself instead of the group...and then i practice LOA and other things...I have found that people i hate leave the country...two people have done that...I personally believe everything happens for a reason...so I believe it's working for me...if it doesn't work though I come to the conclusion that I just have not met the right people...and that's what it sounds like the problem may be if you dont want to bend to fit, then you need to find people that are willing to accept you and that you're willing to accept...which would mean they would have to be mature...it's hard to find actually. I also try to think to myself that my friends either have an unconditional love towards me or they don't...I can usually "feel" this out. And I know my boundaries then. I also reciprocate this to them(unconditional love). In any relationship though, it's good to know where the boundaries are...like someone can do something really shitty to me and I will immediately forgive and be happy if they say...but I did this or am doing this to make up for it...that to me allows my expectations to fall but then come back up, realizing that they are just human, and they're only doing the best they can at that given time...and I usually appreciate their intentions and find that they do actually have a heart...In reality I have not once met someone that has said "Let me do this to make up for what I did, I'm sorry" usually just get a sorry...so good luck with that lol... Am I, at all, touching on what you're saying? lol

OK, though I Wasn't just talking about social situations, regarding "bending to fit", but rather career/profession as well (like moving up in an organization, or competing for talent). But then, I guess the same thing would hold; maybe it's not the right career or profession.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Just going through Kiloby's site, and found this excellent description he gave of the Shadow: http://kiloby.com/writings.php?writingid=263

I can see his ultimate view is a “non-dual” one, meaning there's no real division between “self” and “others”, which I guess leads to that “all is One” view of Eastern philosophy. (So that answers my question of what "separation" is about. It's the sense that we are separate from each other and objects in our awareness). Funny, but he actually criticizes it for not having a concept of the shadow. I never realized that.
Also funny, we've recently had a bunch of topics on life/death here and on PerC, and this makes the non-dual view sound very likely.

Having to deal with the fallout from being at such a crossroads, I like how it discusses the whole thing about uncertainty in “awareness”, and how it makes all of us, no matter which side we take on any set of opposites, fight strongly against what is unchosen.
 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Just going through Kiloby's site, and found this excellent description he gave of the Shadow: http://kiloby.com/writings.php?writingid=263

I can see his ultimate view is a “non-dual” one, meaning there's no real division between “self” and “others”, which I guess leads to that “all is One” view of Eastern philosophy. (So that answers my question of what "separation" is about. It's the sense that we are separate from each other and objects in our awareness). Funny, but he actually criticizes it for not having a concept of the shadow. I never realized that.
Also funny, we've recently had a bunch of topics on life/death here and on PerC, and this makes the non-dual view sound very likely.

Having to deal with the fallout from being at such a crossroads, I like how it discusses the whole thing about uncertainty in “awareness”, and how it makes all of us, no matter which side we take on any set of opposites, fight strongly against what is unchosen.

WOW ...this IS a really good description. Thank you!!! so much to reflect on :happy2:
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Just finished this book: http://www.amazon.com/Living-Your-Unlived-Life-Unrealized/dp/1585426997/ref=pd_sim_b_4
and it shed more light on a non-dual interpretation of life.

In later chapters, it points out that our consciousness divides all of reality into split dichotomies.
This explain type theory, and why it's all about opposites, with one preferred in consciousness, and an opposite suppressed into the unconscious!


As one person I was discussing the apparently "universal" symmetries of nature (including type theory) with told me: "I can absolutely appreciate your pleasure in the logic, symmetry, and predictability of Beebe's system, but the fact remains that Nature isn't logical. It's cyclical, yes, but the Ego isn't, and our frameworks are creations of the Ego. This positively ensures that every model casts its own Shadow, which includes elements it can't acknowledge or classify without undermining its founding premise."

I could sense that this was probably right, but couldn't figure why. But this book showed that it's the ego that divides reality into opposites.

So to explain it as I have come to understand; example: light and dark. In reality, that is nonexistent, and there is no difference between areas we call light and dark; you only have rays of photon energy at different wavelengths in different areas, and the dichotomy is created by receptors in our physical makeup picking up some of these wavelengths as sensory stimulation our consciousness interprets as “light”.

The first set of opposites is “I / not I”; and everything gets placed into these categories. Since we are in bodies located in a particular place and time, then this extends to “here / not here” and “now / not now”.

It's the state of being imbedded in something that creates dichotomous splits. A dimension we are looking in becomes split into “ahead” and “behind”. Yet a perpendicular line we are looking at from a distance is not divided like that, but can be seen as a whole.
However, since it represents a dimension that we are nevertheless still embedded in, a line parallel to it can be drawn through us, and the dimension is nevertheless still divided; either into left/right, or above/below. Time of course is divided into past/future.

God and evil is also another split we are familiar with, and according to the biblical narrative, we were not originally equipped to handle this. When we took it on, then we "fell" into our current state, which is really more about our perception of things, then the universe and nature being truly "evil". (It was described as "very good", but then our perspective changed, and the first thing was the shame, regarding our own existence. The entire Biblical story of redemption is about the undoing of this through the sacrifice of Christ; though the Church would ironically continue to promote, and in fact greatly emphasize knowledge of good and evil, in thinking the Gospel is essentially that we need to be made "good" by being saved from an evil universe.

Animals would also consist of brain-based portions of awareness, but their brains don't have the capacity to host a full ego, (Animals are said to have souls, but not spirits), so they go on preprogrammed instincts.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
So we are naturally set up as the center of our perspective, so that the entire universe is divided by our location in it. (Space, time, chance {actualized potential reality} or identity).

This makes me think more of what our egos really are. It seems all of our consciousness is tied to the brain, so you wonder what else is left to represent the "soul" or "spirit". Why should just a bunch of chemicals and nerves create a sentient, individual entity? Perhaps it's what the non-dualists call "awareness".

So in our makeup, it seems “awareness” is what provides the consciousness, and the brain (with its storage of personal experience) provides the individual or differentiated entity. It's like having one body of water, and pouring it into many different shaped containers.

(In my view, this “one” entity could not be God, because then we'd all be incarnations of God, and in Christian theology, only Christ is God Incarnate. So it's another entity created by God; let's say, “Adam”, who was then breathed into the body, and first divided when the female was split off, and then they began dividing it into all of humanity. This idea would actually make more sense of the Calvinistic hamartological concept of “federal headship” in more than just a physical sense; where we were all “in Adam”).

Question that remains is, what makes the brain a receptor of this awareness?
I'm thinking it might be some sort of "resonation of vibrational energy" setup, the way radio transmission works. Life is "energy", of course, and energy is usually manifested in some sort of motion, (if nothing more than just the atoms and molecules). I know I have seen "vibrational energy" as something associated with occult religion, or at least the Egyptologists I once saw selling literature (Metu Neter) in the subway years ago. Googling "life as vibrational energy" brought up a whole bunch of LOA sites, and I still don't buy that vibrating the right way will change mail that is already on its way to your house. (That would truly be magic/witchcraft). I can see where vibration would subtly influence other people, though (hence, what we call "vibes"; this site explains it: http://www.stevenaitchison.co.uk/blog/matching-vibrational-energy). I don;t think that can be taken to too far an extend either. So a person might be more likely to send you a check, though it won't stop a bill from coming.

Anyway, something in the neurons must vibrate at a certain frequency, and it resonates with some sort of awareness energy that fills the universe and affects at least the strings spacetime consists of, and creates a bounded "portion" of awareness tied (in a particular location and time) to the body the brain is apart of, and when it begins filling up with experience, we generate a new "person".

Sounds so spaced out compared to anything I've ever though of before, but it seems to be what would make the most sense according to the way the rest of the universe works, and provide a workable idea of what the ego really is.

(Computers):"firmware""hardware""software"
Humans:soulbodyspirit
Individual:egobrainpsyche
goal:survivalnourishmentindividuation
Awareness:individualsensoryone whole
Primal state:[safe]"naked""unashamed"
Emotions:courage/fear
hope/despair
peace/anger
desire/aversion
joy/sadness
love/hate
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Qualia

Just finished this book: http://www.amazon.com/Living-Your-Unlived-Life-Unrealized/dp/1585426997/ref=pd_sim_b_4
and it shed more light on a non-dual interpretation of life.

In later chapters, it points out that our consciousness divides all of reality into split dichotomies.
This explain type theory, and why it's all about opposites, with one preferred in consciousness, and an opposite suppressed into the unconscious!

As one person I was discussing the apparently "universal" symmetries of nature (including type theory) with told me: "I can absolutely appreciate your pleasure in the logic, symmetry, and predictability of Beebe's system, but the fact remains that Nature isn't logical. It's cyclical, yes, but the Ego isn't, and our frameworks are creations of the Ego. This positively ensures that every model casts its own Shadow, which includes elements it can't acknowledge or classify without undermining its founding premise."

I could sense that this was probably right, but couldn't figure why. But this book showed that it's the ego that divides reality into opposites.

So to explain it as I have come to understand; example: light and dark. In reality, that is nonexistent, and there is no difference between areas we call light and dark; you only have rays of photon energy at different wavelengths in different areas, and the dichotomy is created by receptors in our physical makeup picking up some of these wavelengths as sensory stimulation our consciousness interprets as “light”.

The first set of opposites is “I / not I”; and everything gets placed into these categories. Since we are in bodies located in a particular place and time, then this extends to “here / not here” and “now / not now”.

It's the state of being imbedded in something that creates dichotomous splits. A dimension we are looking in becomes split into “ahead” and “behind”. Yet a perpendicular line we are looking at from a distance is not divided like that, but can be seen as a whole.
However, since it represents a dimension that we are nevertheless still embedded in, a line parallel to it can be drawn through us, and the dimension is nevertheless still divided; either into left/right, or above/below. Time of course is divided into past/future.

God and evil is also another split we are familiar with, and according to the biblical narrative, we were not originally equipped to handle this. When we took it on, then we "fell" into our current state, which is really more about our perception of things, then the universe and nature being truly "evil". (It was described as "very good", but then our perspective changed, and the first thing was the shame, regarding our own existence. The entire Biblical story of redemption is about the undoing of this through the sacrifice of Christ; though the Church would ironically continue to promote, and in fact greatly emphasize knowledge of good and evil, in thinking the Gospel is essentially that we need to be made "good" by being saved from an evil universe.

Animals would also consist of brain-based portions of awareness, but their brains don't have the capacity to host a full ego, (Animals are said to have souls, but not spirits), so they go on preprogrammed instincts.

Sure, we perceive by making distinctions. And the more distinctions, the more we see.

Sure, we don't see the wavelengths of light, we see light and dark and colour - we see qualia.

And qualia are -

1. ineffable; that is, they cannot be communicated, or apprehended by any other means than direct experience.

2. intrinsic; that is, they are non-relational properties, which do not change depending on the experience's relation to other things.

3. private; that is, all interpersonal comparisons of qualia are systematically impossible.

4. directly or immediately apprehensible in consciousness; that is, to experience a quale is to know one experiences a quale, and to know all there is to know about that quale.

And if we make no distinctions, we see nothing, not a quale.
 
Top