>
> --- In [email protected], new_morning_blank_slate
> <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > While I get your point, I would argue that in this case, excuse and
> > explanation overlap a bit.
>
> Sure, an explanation can be used as an excuse.
>
> Why did he bring unstressing up? Was he
> > implying that he was unstressing, but still had 100% control of his
> > actions and takes 100% responsibility for them?
>
> Well, that gets into the whole issue of the nature
> of free will. I don't think this case needs to be
> that complicated. Let's say for the sake of argument
> that he could have chosen to restrain himself.
> Perhaps he's saying it was more difficult to make
> that choice because of the unstressing, but he still
> could have made it if he had exerted the extra
> effort, and he takes responsibility for not having
> made it.
OK. Food for thought.
> > The purpose in mentioning unstressing, IMO, is to garner sympathy,
> > and to implicitly make the case that he did not have 100% control
> > of his actions and thus cannot take 100% responsibility for them.
> > To me he is weaving the implicit arguement that, "I was
> > unstressing. I only had PARTIAL control of my actions and thus
> > can only takes partial responsibility for them. Unstessing IS a
> > reality. Have pity on me. I am a VICTIM of unstressing."
>
> Sure. But you can take responsibility for allowing
> yourself to be a victim of unstressing, in the sense of
> not making the extra effort to restrain yourself from
> doing something bad and stupid and then having to take
> the consequences.
OK. But if one is allowing yourself to be a victim of unstressing, we
are into "excuse land" IMO.
> > But the deeper reason I think its a phony explanation, as stated in
> > an adjacent post, heavy unstressing is most usually a phenomenon
> > heavy rounding. He was not heavily rounding as far as I can see.
>
> Oh, for pete's sake, unstressing can happen at any
> time, whether you're rounding or not. It's more likely
> to happen during heavy rounding, but any given meditation
> session, during rounding or not, can wake up an elephant.
Which is a nice segue to make an important point. There are many
levels of unstressing. Sure some "low level" unstressing goes on in
the field, in daily life.,TM 2x. But my implicit point, now being made
explicitly, is that low-level unstressing is not debilitating, it is
a nussance, but not a thing (all but thereally unstable) can't easily
deal with. Its like a small headache. Or one beer. One can "maintain"
to use stoner lingo. One still has full control of their rational
faculties. Know right from wrong, knowing one is inappropriately
hitting on someone (an employee?) is not diminished. "Diminshied
capacity" is not credible plea.
Using the analogy you cited, huge deep seated elephants DON'T suddenly
riseup and start charging full speed IN DAY TO DAY tm/2x routine, in
the field. They slowly wake up, maybe crap a little here and there day
by day, but its gradual and low level. Especially with asanas,
pranayam, siddhis (especially flying -- which IME eats up
unstressing),feeling body, ayur-ved med, ayur-ved self- oil massage,
ayur-ved treatments, yagyas, listening to ved, etc.
AND after 30 years, the wild-ass crazy surface elephants that can be
awakened in TM 2x/day have all been zapped.
I emphasized "heavy unstressing" which is pretty much limited to heavy
rounding courses. In heavy unstressing, in some extreme cases, one
might be able to make a reasonable case for diminished capacity, not
fully recognizing right from wrong, the mind and intellect not having
full control of actions, etc. Basically the "temporaty insanity" defense.
My point, DOJ was not in heavy rounding, he was not heavily
unstressing, he cannot plead diminished capacity. At worst (best?) he
was experiencing low level unstressing. Of anyone (PHD in psych, 25
years in TMO, lots of time around MMY, well versed in TM research) he
knew the symptoms well, and knew how to deal with them.
> I hold no particular brief for O-J; he may be a
> thoroughgoing cad for all I know. But the issue of
> taking responsibility is interesting in the abstract.
Yes, its an interesting issue IMO. Thats why it caught my attention.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Religion and spirituality | Maharishi mahesh yogi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
