Well, this could get murky depending on the individual/culture and the filters used to define and experience both objective and subjective reality plus languages differ and can have a huge effect upon ideas and understanding. Also, you have to figure in the influence of family and the emotional health of an individual- let's face it, we are subjects of our enviornment whether a dysfunctional family or a screwed up culture, etc. However, the individual is capable of change, adaptation, or whatever if dedication, circumstances, luck, fate, etc. are favorable. In that regard, we are our own hero/heroine, On the other hand, life is too grim to ever change for some humans.
On May 4, 3:06 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]> wrote: > All objective things are dependent in some way also. Just in a different > way. > > I think subjective things are dependent in the way we associate them with > each other. Objective things are more physically dependent. > > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:46 PM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > To me, what Chuck said about ‘dependence’ is of utmost importance > > here. All subjective things are dependent. > > > On May 3, 9:30 pm, the taoist shaman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > PSK if at some point someones conciousness dident tell them not to be > > > selfish then how is it possible that you were ever told not to be > > > selfish ? > > > > pol.science kid wrote: > > > > selfishness is contrary to collective consciousness true..but isnt > > > > that the most real thing about us..i wonder..i wasnt told that > > > > selfishness is bad...would my conscience strike me...keep me in > > > > check...because...sometimes...my thoughts...they shock and repulse > > > > me... i loathe myself for having such thoughts..and then i > > > > wonder...if that is not me...but it is me...it is hard ...to know that > > > > oyu are what you might condemn in someone else...and so i ask > > > > often... > > > > > On May 3, 1:04 pm, the taoist shaman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > PSK selfishness arouses discontent because it is contrary to > > > > > collective consciousness , try reading the meditations of marcus > > > > > auralius chapter 2 verse 1 from the harvard classics . > > > > > > gabbydott wrote: > > > > > > From a top-down perspective this is correct. But I understood that > > PSK asked > > > > > > for individual responses from each of us. > > > > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:09 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > But you have to admit there are humans who haven't the chance to > > even > > > > > > > consider this type of thinking as their lives are miserable due > > to > > > > > > > poverty, war, sickness and all other ills. Plus- what does a > > culture > > > > > > > celebrate? Wealth? Power? Etc.? You can hardly fault some for > > buying a > > > > > > > false self and image if that is what their culture teaches them, > > can > > > > > > > you? It takes a brave rebel to contradict society or challenge > > group > > > > > > > thought. > > > > > > > > On May 2, 12:20 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > If the selfish would truly search their self, they'd quickly > > die out. > > > > > > > > Problem is how they don't see themselves but see themselves in > > the others > > > > > > > > with the poor others not knowing that they are not taken for > > themselves > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > for someone else. My explanation. > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 6:57 PM, pol.science kid < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > at the first glance of your reply came a thought to my mind > > about > > > > > > > > > collective consciousness...rather a question...does the > > collective > > > > > > > > > consciousness exist independently...what does it mean > > exactly...to put > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > crudely is it the realisation that you are not the only > > phenomena..but > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > i feel is....it is very difficult to transcend ones own > > person...but is > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > important....why do we really get irritated with self > > absorbed or self > > > > > > > > > seeking people....why do we condemn selfishness..in any > > sense...are we > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > insecure as to feel deprived because of that ...or is it > > something > > > > > > > more.. i > > > > > > > > > hope i make sense.. and i hope you get waht i am trying to > > ask...i > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > like all to answer...cos i really want to know.... > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:36 PM, DarkwaterBlight < > > > > > > > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> This take appeals to my understanding. Perpetually changing, > > evolving > > > > > > > > >> and reforming. Input has an outcome and causes an expanded > > "mind > > > > > > > > >> space", if you will. Is logic all logical and what is to be > > said about > > > > > > > > >> rationalizing the "irrational"? Should my thinking be > > correct by the > > > > > > > > >> standards of others or to my own? What of "raising the bar" > > in > > > > > > > > >> consciousness and of a paradigm shift to a more correct > > thinking of > > > > > > > > >> our "collective mind" ? Of all that goes into into thought > > and mind is > > > > > > > > >> this not the desired effect? > > > > > > > > > >> On Apr 30, 9:23 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > might thought be colored by the mind that engages it > > ....what is the > > > > > > > > >> realm > > > > > > > > >> > of pure thought that you mention here .... is it logic and > > > > > > > > >> > rationalisation...do you mean the method of employing that > > > > > > > > >> thought...because > > > > > > > > >> > ....knowing...percieving something for the first time the > > mind will > > > > > > > > >> > automatically fall back on the things it thinks it does > > know.... > > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Chad Moore < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > Knowledge unites, in being or in identity. Thinking > > separates, in > > > > > > > > >> > > subject-object relationship. > > > > > > > > >> > > Knowing has no place in the ordinary thought process. > > Thinking > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > >> > > something > > > > > > > > >> > > which has to be known is wrong, since it moves in a > > vicious > > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > >> You > > > > > > > > >> > > cannot think > > > > > > > > >> > > of anything you have not known. Such thinking can never > > take you > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > >> the > > > > > > > > >> > > Truth. > > > > > > > > >> > > But when you direct your thought to something (say > > yourself) which > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > >> have > > > > > > > > >> > > otherwise > > > > > > > > >> > > visualized, the thought loses its own characteristics > > and limits, > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > >> > > stands > > > > > > > > >> > > revealed as that Self (Consciousness) itself. Thought is > > thus > > > > > > > reduced > > > > > > > > >> into > > > > > > > > >> > > its essence. > > > > > > > > > >> > -- > > > > > > > > >> > \--/ Peace- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > >> > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > \--/ Peace- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
