How wonderful this would be, but must first begin with each of us being honest with ourselves. This is very difficult, and many of us are not able to do it because our own shadow aspects cloud our visions. Which is where a good life partner or family can come in, pointing out our blind spots. Getting over our need to be right, dominate, act out, drive our own agenda, self promote, barter honesty for affection or attention - all get in the the way of true self honesty. If we are immersed in our mean green MEME and out to save the world, we may not understand our own self righteous narrow moral base, seeking instead that wonderful charge we feel when we think we are helping our fellow humans and righting the wrongs of the world by proving others wrong. At this detour of the developmental spiral, by our inability to move beyond the us against them mentality, we are not honestly assessing ourselves to discover that what we see as wrong in others is true of us, and everyone. Until we can be this honest, and allow our more honest aspects to surface, taking a more compassionate viewpoint toward all, real honesty is not possible. But while in the thick of it, we do not see it. Being against brings out the warrior in us, and until we realize that we can deal the fatal blow in a war, but choose not to, we are stuck here searching for the meaning of honesty. I am not sure that individually or collectively, we are able to work together until then.
On Feb 28, 2:47 am, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > This line of thinking, err, counting, serves to distract. > > The operative spirit is stated by Neil : " ... how we might live and > what we could be ... " If our start is honest, we'll have the answers > for ourself. > > That's the rub, though. Honesty ! Animals are rarely dishonest, but > experience tells me, it's a very evolved attribute for us to have. How > many crooks will admit that they seek, value and expect their people > to be honest to them, that honesty is therefore the more fundamental > and superceding a value even among the dishonest, and that they must > therefore embrace it fully in their own life and not give in to these > dishonest ways in thought and deed ? ! > > Honesty is difficult because it demands a consistent core within > ourself. That needs investment from us ... an Honesty Foundation, to > seed and nurture and promote honesty as the preferred value in our > pragmatic and expedience filled lives, on a massive scale. It would > have to be planned, organised for and executed. But, seeming so > uneconomic and non viable, who's to fund it ? I believe, it is for the > world of business and the government to step in, simply because they > have the money and the power, and the mandate. > > Our connectivity program would initiate from there. > > On Feb 28, 10:56 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Archy, the operative word there is ‘gratuitous’. Where is the line > > drawn? There are limited resources and mankind is apt to deal in terms > > of power. Is one chicken in every pot enouth?....two?...three? > > > On Feb 27, 7:07 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The question in science for me concerns how we might live and what we > > > could be if we could escape gratuitous competition. I can see some > > > personal ways to escape, but these seem to lack connectivity with > > > others that seems the route we are cast on. > > > > On 28 Feb, 02:14, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I don't know that a divisibility issue thread would go all that far. > > > > Thurman's reference to the collider basically is demonstrative of > > > > man's desire to reach an end that can be held on to, owned and > > > > possessed. Problem being that even with the Hadron establishing the > > > > first successful particle collision and supposed gathering of sub > > > > atomic information pertaining to universe origin and/or the > > > > fundamental nature of matter seems hardly the end of the line or the > > > > point of conclusion with regard to infinite divisibility. This > > > > basically renders the LHC experiment a 5 billion dollar playstation > > > > game. How can the science of infinite divisibility be carried out > > > > without infinite experimentation. Will we, even can we, get past this > > > > point of atomic particles? There remains the unresolved enigmas of > > > > dark matter/energy and the Higgs Boson. I find the phrase God > > > > Particle a bit entertaining but who knows what we'll discover over the > > > > next 500 years if we don't accidentally cause a planetary implosion. > > > > > On Feb 27, 9:58 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Oh, and the issue of infinite divisibility… perhaps ripe for a new > > > > > topic? Or would it be appropriate here? I know I’ve approached this > > > > > analysis a few times here at ME and so far find it sound. Of course on > > > > > one level, not having completed the science (most likely an > > > > > impossibility), “we” do not know as you point out Slip. Yet on other > > > > > levels including thought experiments and analysis, it most assuredly > > > > > points to the nature of reality. > > > > > > On Feb 27, 6:08 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > It was interesting but not sure it adds to or lends any credibility > > > > > > to > > > > > > Buddism. Its just another view I guess. Not sure about everything > > > > > > being infinitely divisible. I'd visit Tibet but my lungs won't go. > > > > > > > On Feb 27, 12:59 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Robert Thurman > > > > > > > > Topics include: > > > > > > > The Growing popularity of Atheism > > > > > > > Buddhism’s Stance on Deism > > > > > > > Buddhism and the Meaning of Life > > > > > > > Hyperrealism in Buddhism > > > > > > > Backstage interview > > > > > > > Obama and the History of Christianity in America > > > > > > > The Chinese Occupation of Tibet > > > > > > > Why the Dalai Lama Matters > > > > > > > The Source of the Dalai Lama’s Popularity > > > > > > > > Many points here…most are quite interesting. What do you think? > > > > > > > >http://fora.tv/2009/02/09/Robert_Thurman_at_City_Arts__Lectures > > > > > > > > I studied w/Bob back in the mid 80s.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
