Your only obligation in any lifetime is be true to yourself Allan On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:34 PM, pol.science kid <[email protected]>wrote:
> you know..another thing here...struck me kind of > late...re-enforcement....acknowledging of our 'achievement'...the basic need > for approval...rewards..and constant need for proving...does it have > anything to do with the underlying psychological social bent ...and are they > necessarily innate... > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:02 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I do agree with the innate idea- thinking of the joy an infant feels >> when learning to stand/walk/toss food off his highchair tray,etc. But >> that joy is best when encouraged by parents or caregivers and that >> bonus really doesn't change much through life. An individual can feel >> a sense of accomplishment on his own yet still yearns for re- >> enforcement of some sort- of which their are many- one could even >> depend on abstract rewards.// Family, religion, education, society are >> some of the more important channels we must choose how to swim/ >> navigate and our own individual nature may have to oppose rather than >> comply which can be subtle or violent and everything in-between. I >> feel rebellion against authority is a natural state of becoming a >> distinct individual but all rests on method and outcome. Another >> factor is maturity- often our understanding of and empathy for our >> parents comes round when we become parents, for instance >> >> On Mar 9, 6:18 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: >> > PSK, the notion of feeling empowered *IF* associated with actual being/ >> > will, is innate. Such an experience one either is aware of or asleep >> > to along with differing levels of perception. >> > >> > Conditions?...it can make a difference; however, the same setting for >> > different people will often result in different levels of awareness of >> > will so as I see it, other factors are of more importance. >> > >> > On Mar 9, 2:45 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > As you say....the modes are both only different methods of percieving >> > > perhaps....what i want to know orn...is when does an individual feel >> > > empowered....an individual...a will...an active will....what >> attributes to >> > > it...what conditions...is it more likely in a certain setting.....i >> hope i >> > > make sense >> > >> > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 5:09 PM, ornamentalmind >> > > <[email protected]>wrote: >> > >> > > > “i guess ..i meant a secular rather than a religious or theological >> > > > mode of >> > > > understanding things...the world.... “ – PSK >> > >> > > > Well, that does point towards an area of your beliefs so thanks for >> > > > this much. Perhaps you could be even more specific? >> > >> > > > As far as I’ve found out…reviewing human thought over the ages,… >> > > > secular and religious views often are at the very least intertwined. >> > >> > > > On the other hand, perhaps you are being much more literal when you >> > > > use the notion of “…mode of understanding things…”. If this is the >> > > > case, a more specific unpacking of what the two apparently (to you) >> > > > different modes would be of value, OK? >> > >> > > > I’ll suspend judgment until I hear more. >> > >> > > > On Mar 7, 3:01 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > i guess ..i meant a secular rather than a religious or theological >> mode >> > > > of >> > > > > understanding things...the world.... >> > >> > > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:21 PM, ornamentalmind >> > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: >> > >> > > > > > “…revolution in knowledge and philosophy…” – PSK ??? >> > >> > > > > > To continue the discussion, one would need to know what you mean >> here. >> > > > > > Would you unpack it a bit? >> > >> > > > > > Before actually knowing what you mean, I see little if any >> > > > > > ‘revolution’ in this context. Yes, there is a process of change >> in >> > > > > > thought over the millennia yet such general ‘change’ doesn’t >> mean a >> > > > > > progression towards a more accurate view. Case in point – you >> are >> > > > > > apparently using the dialectical view of one view being in >> > > > > > contradiction with another. While many do apprehend in this way, >> in no >> > > > > > way is that an indicator of the accuracy of such a view. >> > >> > > > > > As best as I can see, both can be known consubstantially. >> > >> > > > > > On Mar 7, 2:25 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > > > > > I was thinking .... i agree with what yuo guys say ....could >> it also >> > > > be >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > > revolution in knowledge and philosophy...when it was >> > > > questioned....what >> > > > > > > can an INdividual know.....it kind of pitts one against the >> whole in >> > > > this >> > > > > > > struggle to know...or salvation through knowledge...what >> say.... >> > >> > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:01 PM, pol.science kid < >> > > > [email protected] >> > > > > > >wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > > True we have come a long way..and the word has been taken >> for >> > > > > > > > granted....but i would like an opinion of each one of you >> ...on the >> > > > > > > > Sanctity of Freedom.... it is also my casual inference >> > > > > > > > that....individuality ...the modern obsession with >> it....how come >> > > > > > > > some primitive tribes...hold the community at a level above >> the >> > > > > > > > individual....while it is not quite so in our >> 'modernised'...or >> > > > rather >> > > > > > > > westernised world.....are there concepts of radicalised >> > > > individuality >> > > > > > > > in the oriental philosophy..... need your opoinions fellows >> > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > \--/ Peace >> > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > \--/ Peace >> > >> > > -- >> > > \--/ Peace- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > - Show quoted text - > > > > > -- > \--/ Peace > -- ( ) I_D Allan If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
