In the last several topics, we've explored the notion of a collective consciousness, and of a collective paradigm that is based on the belief that we are not whole; need fixing; and are not fully capable to run our own lives (therefore, those who "know" better than we, should be allowed to make decisions on our behalf -- be it in healthcare, politics, religion, or life).
For specific references, please visit:
Genius Fiddling While Rome Burns -- What Might Africa, The Middle East, and Global Warming Tell Us About Our Personal and Collective Mind?
or
Naked Genius -- Being the Difference We Want to See in the World
We also delved into the notion of our own egos -- and the mythical role in which we cast ourselves as the central (and generally heroic) character of life's story. Several contributors have also proffered the idea that our addiction to our own self importance is one of the primary causes of the continuation of not only our own ego-myth, but also of the collective story of incurable lack (and therefore the need for continual consumption) that has been laid forth as the basis of our modern culture (and the its accompanying justification for a constant-growth economy and profit at the expense of all else).
Hand-in-hand with this notion, we explored the driving urgency that leads many to feel (perhaps stemming from the sense of our own importance and the fundamental assumption that our own view is correct -- or at least most correct) that we must change the world (or alter the collective consciousness).
This idea met with great skepticism by some and the suggestion by others that changing the collective consciousness is not only futile, but unnecessary. Perhaps what we should thus focus on, some suggested, is what we would like to clear up in ourselves. Though we've taken a shallow dive into that topic previously, my hope is that in this new topic we can move beyond concepts, beliefs, and platitudes and share some real experiences that each of us may have had or ones you'd like to create (i.e. I'm looking to move as much as possible into the experiential versus the theoretical).
So here's an invitation:
What is it, you'd like to see the world (i.e. yourself) change, do more of, less of, or do better? What is it that you could do that, without the need to change others, might impact in the most positive way how you experience your life, those in your life, and your circumstances? What is it you could do (or possibly stop doing) to make your life richer, more meaningful to you, and enhance the odds of enriching the lives of those around you as well, should they feel the need to be so enriched?
And lastly, while I'm very interested in what we're already doing that is working, I'm also very interested in what you know would make a significant difference for your life that your not doing; and why you believe you're not.
Oh... and one final note... I'm truly appreciative of all of the ideas, comments, and contributions of everyone who's taken the time to participate actively in this blog. I also know there's a number of people who write me that they are regular readers, but haven't yet commented for a variety of reasons. I definitely respect everyone's right to participate in whatever way is appropriate for them -- and I also encourage anyone reading this blog to comment. We will all most assuredly benefit from more voices and fresh perspectives.
Your ideas, questions, stories, and humor are most welcome,
Christopher
P.S. As always remember that to see the comments in a separate window, click on the "Comments" link. To see the comments in the body of the topic, click "Links to this Post"
Views of those commenting have not been checked for accuracy and do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog publisher or his associates.
Christopher, I admire your tenacity. It appears you are very determined to get to the core of this topic. I had pretty much resigned myself on the previous topic to having faced the unanswerable question -- once we start dabbling in the realm of the collective unconscious I, like KBF, Trinh, and others apparently felt like we were truly tilting at windmills (to use the metaphor exploited in a previous topic).
ReplyDeleteBut now, with the refinement of your questions, I think we have something upon which to ponder. And it's not that this is new territory in this blog, but it seems that if we approach this whole subject from enough angles, we might actually penetrate it at some point.
So as not to simply comment, but to contribute, I can offer the first disclosure by saying that something I would like to see more of in this world (and thus in myself) is a focus on something other than money as the primary driver behind our values systems (and the measure by which damned near everything is gauged).
I've spent entirely too much of my energy focused on money -- for now, for the future, for my children's future. I remember my parents, but even more so my grandparents. They had so very little in terms of material possessions. And yet, they seemed endlessly content -- genuinely happy. I reflect back to a time when the value of a person (and a company for that matter) were based on the character of the person, not the level of their financial success.
I find myself yearning to re-discover those feelings. It may simply be a case of mere nostalgia, but I do believe that when what mattered more was relationship, heart, and love, the world I lived in was a far better, far less cynical, far more trusting place in which to live.
What's holding me back from returning to that space? I'm going to have to spend some time walking in the fields near my home to give you an honest answer on that topic.
Until then,
Silvio
So who's emailing who now Mr. Silvio? (Get in there and say something he tells me)...
ReplyDeleteWell... I'll tell you what I want to see more of (and yeah it applies to me too)... and that is less fear mongering!
I mean give me a total frigging break already... we're being totally played in this world... this election... our companies...
It's like somebody figured out if we can scare the shit out of people... they'll do whatever we f#@king tell them too...
Enough is enough... and so what I can do is stop playing into the bullshit! And why haven't I up till now... it sounds stupid... but it's true... I've been afraid to.
Long way to go from my shooting my mouth off here and actually doing it... but Silvio... Ellio... Trinh... Anna... you are around me enough on the phone... sometimes in person. If you hear me falling for the fear mongering crap again... kick me in the ass!
Love you all and ain't afraid to say so,
JJ
Fear, my young friend, is the weapon of choice of all who those wish to keep many people from living as whole beings. I am very happy for you that you have discovered this and are full of energy about not being in its power any longer.
ReplyDeleteI was taught by those much wiser than me that to live in fear is to live a life imprisoned by a jail with no walls. To live life fully, open-hearted, and alive is truly a gift of the most precious kind.
Thank you for reminding this old man of that important teaching.
Trinh
I really want to share with all of you how my life has changed since being introduced to this blog. I know I came in like an angry presence into a peaceful room, but you all were kind enough and honest enough with me to point out something that I know others have tried to help me see for years.
ReplyDeleteSeveral months back, it seems, following some stiff, but accurate questioning and advice from Christopher, Anonymous, and others I wrote the following goals in response to one of the questions posed here:
1. Start treating everyone like they matter (and stop acting like it's all about me -- Trinh's comments made me really look honestly at myself)
2. Notice how greedy I am -- how entitled. I've been shocked these last few weeks to watch myself and listen to what I say. Damn! I've got some straightening out to do.
I must say that since I've begun to follow these two simple steps, the world has become a different place. Not only have I been received differently (and I'll admit that people are often shocked by my new way of being), but I've begun to truly understand people, see them deeply perhaps for the first time. This has enabled me to help discover solutions with them and become a real resource instead of a thorn in people's side.
Thank you to all of you for creating a place where people can count on honest feedback and real caring.
With much appreciation,
Tarah
A colleague of mine, knowing how passionate I am about the topic on which I’ll briefly expound, recommended I read your blog because, in their words, “Thomas, you have an opportunity to help a group of very bright, but lost souls find their way back to reality.”
ReplyDeleteI’m not sure, I’d go to quite those lengths, but I must say, upon reading some of your comments that the seemingly humanitarian approach you have consistently taken throughout this blog does approach the naïve at times. My primary area of interest is in the economy and I’ll use it as an example to share with you precisely to what I refer when I make the aforementioned statement.
Take a step backwards and take a broad, sweeping view of the economy. Look at it, but do not focus on the "short run" of calendar-year quarters or even of a year or two in which shifts in investment spending and other shocks push the unemployment rate up or down. Next, look at it, but do not focus on the "long run" period of three to ten years or so, in which prices have time to adjust to return the economy to a full-employment equilibrium but in which the economy's productive resources do not change much.
What do we see we do so? When we take that step backwards and focus on the very long run of decades and generations: a period over which everything else dwindles into insignificance except the sustained and significant increases in standards of living that we call long-run economic growth.
When we take this broad, sweeping view, it is clear that what we are calling economic growth is the only truly important factor in creating a stable economy and in providing a higher standard of living for people.
For example, material standards of living and levels of economic productivity in the United States today are more than four times what they are today in, say, Mexico (and more than nine times those of Egypt, and more than forty times those of Nigeria).
Only a trivial part of these differences is due to whether unemployment in a country is currently above or below its average level, or whether various bad macroeconomic policies are currently disrupting the functioning of the price system.
The overwhelming bulk of these differences is the result of differences in economies' productive potentials, and in the factors that determine productive potential -- the skills of the labor force, the value of the capital stock, and the level of technology and organization currently used in production.
These enormous gaps between the productive potentials of different nations spring from favorable initial conditions and successful growth-promoting economic policies in the United States -- and from less favorable initial conditions and less successful policies in Mexico, and downright unsuccessful policies in Egypt and Nigeria.
Material standards of living and levels of economic productivity in the United States today are at least seven times what they were at the end of the nineteenth century (and more than thirty times what they were at the founding of the republic).
The bulk of today's gap between living standards and productivity levels in the United States and Mexico (and Egypt and Nigeria) has opened up in the past century: the bulk of success (or failure) at boosting an economy's productive potential is thus -- to a historian at least -- of relatively recent origin.
Successful economic growth has meant that nearly all citizens of the United States today live better -- along almost every dimension of material life -- than did even the rich elites of reindustrialize times. If good policies and good circumstances accelerate economic growth, bad policies and bad circumstances cripple long-run economic growth.
Argentines were richer than Swedes before World War I, but Swedes today have four times the standard of living and the productivity level of Argentines.
Bottom line: Growth is not an evil from which one should run. Wise growth and healthy profits keep this world and its standard of living heading in an increasingly positive direction. Without the health of the various first-world economies, we might still be living in conditions which most assuredly the vast majority of you would find abhorrent.
What do I want to see in this world that needs change and what do I do to help bring about that change? I want to end the tyranny of idealism that so often stifles progress and keeps people from realizing their greater potential. I want to help the world understand how complex systems truly function.
Perhaps it all boils down to this simple axiom: Idealism sounds beautiful. Realism makes the world a better place.
Sincerely,
Thomas W.
Thomas, we welcome you and are certainly happy to discuss varying takes on complex subjects. Just a note, however: We really don't tolerate the derision of alternative points of view. Terms such as "naive" and other demeaning adjectives are more than strongly discouraged.
ReplyDeleteYou're clearly a very bright fellow. I'm sure you can find ways of expressing your viewpoint and are able to make your case without resorting to these types of tactics.
Please continue to join us in this discussion, but do accept this notice that future commentary should be absent of such characterizations.
Sincerely,
Christopher
Thomas, a naive idealist like me would certainly never presume to match wits with an economic sage of your obvious accomplishment. I can tell you this on a personal level, however. I have never been more “lost” than when my standard of living, according to the standards you cite, was the very highest. It was only when I pulled the ripcord on that life and refounded not only my economic base, but my own integrity with my world, that I began to experience my life as anything other than miserable. Now, although my economic circumstances are greatly reduced, and likely will be for the foreseeable future, I am for the first time in several decades of living, at peace with my life. And from here, I am able to contribute to the world in ways that do very little for the GNP but have positive impacts in the lives of others far greater than any I ever could while my spirit was suffocating under the crushing weight of my “success”.
ReplyDeleteIf access to an unlimited and ever increasing array of goods and services is your definition of a “reality” that works, I wish you as much of it as you feel you need. I, on the other hand, choose to continue as I am, because the simple process of learning to live with consciousness of my impact on my small, quiet corner of the world has shown me a more pragmatic and “realistic” interchange with my life than ever I dreamed of when my portfolio was bulging.
I have to say I had become somewhat frustrated with our previous topic and had resigned myself to merely reading it rather than commenting. And to be clear, my frustration stemmed from my own difficulties with facing the fact that I've become increasingly habituated to my own comfort.
ReplyDeleteNothing rattles me out of such a malaise, though, like the comments of a gentleman like Thomas. And to him I would respond:
Kind sir, you clearly do not realize the breadth and depth of the people to whom you refer to as naive. I have had the pleasure of associating with and working alongside of many of these individuals and find them capable of matching wits with anyone. Furthermore, I believe it is worth any of us examining our points of view more closely when we are at the stage in our life where we've become convinced that opposing points of view are unenlightened.
Assuming that you are a man of education, I have to also assume that whether you agree with them or not, other economic theories, such as steady-state economics, etc. certainly offer alternative views to the one you've suggested.
Like BKO, I have begun to take a genuine look at the difference between economic growth/profitability and personal prosperity which, for me at least, also brings into the equation more spiritual aspects such as quality of life, the responsibility to future generations, ecological concerns and other values which, while personal, are very real to me.
I certainly respect, as Christopher stated, your right to your point of view -- and I'm sure we could learn much from your experience -- but I also am keenly aware that there are many others in this community, regardless of their educational background or walk in life, who carry a wisdom much deeper than I have yet accumulated and whose opinions I also welcome and respect.
With sincere regard,
Ellio
Thomas, while the neo-classical economic theory of growth has certainly been the model upon which the U.S. has positioned itself as an economic force in the world, there are a vast many of us, outside of the U.S. (and this blog community is comprised of people from almost every continent from what I can tell) who share a different values system than the one which you have put forth as the ultimate truth.
ReplyDeleteAs I'm sure you are well aware, there are numerous arguments against the growth model, with four of them being most critical for many:
1. Growth has negative effects on the quality of life for the vast majority of the planet. Many things that affect the quality of life for humans are not traded in the market nor measured by the market, and they generally lose value when continual growth occurs (i.e. critical elements such as the environment).
2. Growth encourages the creation of artificial needs. Industry stimulates consumers to develop new tastes, and preferences in order for growth to occur. Consequently, wants are created, and consumers have become the servants, instead of the masters, of the economy.
3. Non-renewable resources. Economic growth, based on the model you put forth, has historically depleted non-renewable resources rapidly.
4. Distribution of income (and I realize I'll be accused of being a Marxist for making this comment -- but such is the plight of Canadians in the U.S.) growth may reinforce and propagate unequal distribution of income in ways that create instability and lead to the very global political scenarios we are seeing play out currently.
Whether one chooses to agree with these arguments or sets about to dispel them, the arguments themselves are merely the tip of the iceberg in terms of the essential differences between U.S. (and for that matter historical British) fundamental economic values and many of the other nations on the planet. It may be worth considering that the rest of the world may not be entirely wrong.
If we could all sit down and actually listen to each other and truly be willing to learn from one another, the world would be a vastly different -- and I would propose, more intelligent -- place than it is currently. That’s what I want to see happen in the world, and what I’m committed to fostering.
Sincerely,
Sarah
May I offer a hearty round of applause to all of you who have responded to my brief treatise on the value of examining the realities of our economic system? If only the Republican Party our United States could be so united and come to each others defense with such rigor.
ReplyDeleteAs all of you have suggested, I certainly realize that there are many aspects to life, not the least of which are those more subtle or "spiritual" qualities to which Ellio, BKO, and Sarah refer. When I used the word, naive, however, I did not mean it derisively as Christopher or others may have interpreted. I meant it quite literally, in that I believe that many amongst your group appear to have what I consider to be too great a trust in the nature of humanity and its ability and willingness to behave in a manner that would truly take into account the well-being and equal treatment of all.
Call me cynical, but I would postulate that it is our very ascension into a state of economic privilege, yet to be equaled in the entire history of the world, that allows those of us who would, in other days, be considered commoners to have the luxury of contemplating our spiritual needs or to have the gifted opportunity to decide to cut back, simplify, or attune our lives to the stuff of spirituality.
Furthermore, and I mean no disrespect by this statement, I can see no other place in nature nor throughout the Universe where a steady state can promote let alone sustain life over time. In a world that is constantly growing in terms of population, it seems utterly preposterous to assume that we can maintain a steady state. Growth, my friends, is a given. And it is time we wake up to that fact and instead of opining times of yore, when things were more simple, come to grips with the simple and perhaps disturbing truth that the level of complexity and growth that will occur with or without our permission over the two decades may alter our paradigm of the world in drastically substantial ways. Unless we determine together how to responsibly manage growth and how to deal with profit-motivation in a realistic manner, these decisions will be made without our input while we’re off attending to our spiritual needs.
I hope this clarifies my position more thoroughly and might lead to some additional discussion of a valuable nature. Minds like what appear to have congregated here, to borrow a phrase, are too valuable to waste.
With respect to you all,
Thomas W.
Thomas, being a friend of Lucille's, and the path through which she recommended you to this blog community, I welcome your commentary (though with some trepidation as to what I invited into our family, however indirectly).
ReplyDeleteI must say I've never quite been acquainted with someone who delivers what could be interpreted as back-handed compliments with quite the aplomb as you (you can determine whether you believe that statement to be a compliment or not).
In conclusion, I'm contemplating a reply to your thoughts, but am presently sorting through my own internal dialogue first. I trust it's a good sign, regardless of our loyalty to one another here, that we have been forced out of our comfort zones and challenged to include a more divergent point of view.
Regards to all,
Anna
Thomas, I curious. I certainly agree with the world population irrefutably growing at an almost exponential rate, growth of all kinds will follow.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't that make an even stronger case, however, for working very seriously to manage growth and possibly combine some of the thinking (even if it's at the 30,000 ft. level) of steady-state with the growth models so as to contain the growth more responsibly?
Also, there are many people who are electing to adopt more sustainable lifestyles via co-housing, community gardens, co-op purchasing, and so forth.
What's your thoughts about these types of movements and their impact upon the economy as well as their overall "goodness" or "badness" as it relates to the economy and whether they are "real" solutions, in your estimation or "idealistic" ones?
Christopher
(CO-WRITING WITH ANONYMOUS)
ReplyDeleteThomas, here is a question for you. Why, in your assessment, have spiritual traditions throughout time and all around the world regarded an excess of material goods and an overfocus on temporal conditions and comforts as obstacles to accessing the deeper, less overtly physical aspects of life?
Monks, native shamans, healers and mystics from all cultures and historical periods have pointed to material and psychological simplicity as the first prerequisite to clarity of mind and depth of heart. I think that what some of us have tried to express in our comments here on the blog is that excessive concern with acquisition and possession simply complicates life to a point where the mind and the spirit become numb; desensitized to the deeper currents of the life experience that regardless of our varying philosophical orientations, we all end up seeking sooner or later. Simplicity may not be exotic anymore, but it sure is helpful in getting the volume turned down.
In the last couple of days, we appear to have engaged a debate between classical positivism and constructionism which, I believe, will ultimately lead us to a point where we may find that we are just coming at the same issue from different angles. Again. The material standard of living may just have merit as a tool to assess certain aspects of our quality of life. But the ability to connect with oneself, the stillness of existence and the awareness of our connectedness, internally and externally may have merit, too, in the efforts to assess life from a more ontological, meaning-oriented viewpoint. It seems then that in human terms, “within group” differences are greater than “between group” variances. Science wouldn’t be what it is today without the tension of dichotomy, and in terms of that, Thomas, you have provided us with the very tension you describe as growth. I think you will find that the general tenor of discussion in this group is that we assume that however much truth may be contained in any one viewpoint, all viewpoints are ultimately partial and therefore, none are completely “right” or completely “wrong”, because none are…well…complete. The very purpose of the effort is to step back far enough from ALL our entrenched positions enough that just possibly, some new, deeper information might seep in through the cracks in our hardened attitudes and surprise all of us. Welcome!
And as an addendum to the last comment, I wanted to acknowledge Tarah's comment of a couple of days ago. I'm afraid it may have gotten lost in the shuffle. I get a big kick out of hearing how big a difference the simple things make. In a lot of ways, yours seems to be the clearest answer any of us have made to the question about what our ripple effect is. Nice.
ReplyDeleteCheers.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
ReplyDeleteClearly we have a difference of opinion regarding the value and necessity of economic growth. I also realize that the rather cavalier manner in which I approached this group did not engender the level of trust that might have garnered me more credibility.
That said, that is not what is really at issue here. It is my opinion that contrary to your expressed values regarding your group's openness to other opinions and your willingness to have a full dialogue on topics such as the one I raised, that you are in fact much more attached to and satisfied with your own worldview than you appear willing to acknowledge.
I certainly herald the comments each of you have made in response to my postings and your attempted efforts to include me, inquire about my opinions and so forth. However, as I look over the historical record of your previous conversations in other topics included herein, anyone who has expressed a more mainstream view of the matters being reviewed has been fairly readily chased out of your "community" like an invading virus (unless, of course, they capitulated, at which point they were welcomed in like one who had finally found the light).
Call it spirituality if you like, but narrow-mindedness limits our options regardless of how one dresses it up in the trappings of god, "our planet", or whatever other "cause" one might choose to mask the face of bias.
While I herald your efforts to have a conversation amongst yourselves, I do not believe you are willing or ready for the depth of discussion for which you all seem to hunger. That, my friends, is why you keep returning to this trough and going away hungry.
Sincerely,
Thomas W.
Oh Thomas stop being such a ninny! And I'm sorry if that's a little derisive, Christopher, but I have to say this since he came through my network of friends and is acting so impudently.
ReplyDeleteThomas, you cannot expect to come stomping into someone's house, guns a blazing -- insult the owner's wife -- kick their dog -- make fun of their family traditions -- and then expect a nice civil debate.
We're certainly not a perfect bunch around here -- and we most assuredly have our biases -- but that's why we're here -- to encourage each other beyond those limitations. Why not truly join the discussion instead of being an outside pundit -- a missionary who came to convert the cannibals?
How about you simply answer Christopher's questions for a starting place? He seemed sincere enough to me. Are you afraid to have a real conversation here -- one that involves truly deep listening -- one that might actually lead to all of us growing and expanding our minds?
If you are then you're not the man Lucille thinks you are.
Sincerely,
Anna
My dear Anna (and to her friends here, as well),
ReplyDeleteI must offer my apologies for the rather boorish behavior of my long-time friend. Though he is on his way to London for a conference and likely won't read Anna’s sadly appropriate excoriation of his actions until tomorrow, it was I'm afraid, the manner in which I approached him on this subject that led to him being such a course intruder in an otherwise civil conversation.
What I personally embarrasses me most, however, is that I set him loose on your gracious community based solely on conversations that Anna and I had about this gathering (and my interpretation thereof), rather than my having actually read your words or joined in dialogue with you. For that I offer my further apology. I could learn much from the willingness so many of you share to re-examine your thinking and own up to your biases.
After spending some time last night reading a number of your discussions (feeling so obliged after receiving Anna's justifiably angry phone call), I first of all must say I was touched at the level of caring and concern that you have shown for each other, a relative group of strangers in many cases. I was further impressed by the more than sufficient arsenal of wits and wisdom this group possesses.
So, trusting that Anna's invitation for Thomas to re-engage is also permissible with the group, I will certainly invite, challenge, and strongly encourage him to do so -- but this time as one who possesses a pound of humility for every ounce of hubris he demonstrated heretofore.
Respectfully,
Lucille
Anna, and Lucille,
ReplyDeleteAs was expressed with real clarity by BKO and Anonymous, this group has always been interested in having meaningful discussions around difficult topics. Our goal in that regard, however, is specific in that we try to take as inclusive a look as we are capable of at the variety of ways that solutions might be crafted for our world challenges.
Yes, each of us have our preferred way of seeing the world and if one deems that we have "chased off" (as Thomas accused) those who have expressed different philosophies than our own, then that is something we need to examine for ourselves personally.
But I would suggest (perhaps hopefully) that what we have not welcomed is intellectual bullying, debating for the sake of debating, or demeaning attitudes toward fellow blog community members.
We do have a purpose (as described at the top of this blog) and rules of conduct. As long as one is willing to join us in good faith with those things in mind, they are welcome -- and that includes Thomas.
As for both of your apologies, I cannot speak for the entire group, but as much as I feel Thomas is responsible for his own behavior, I kindly accept and respect your taking ownership for whatever role you feel you've played.
To the entire group -- onward and upward! Let's take the excellent tension (as BKO and Anonymous have called it) and utilize it to further invigorate our discussion.
Sincerely,
Christopher
Whether or not the man Thomas returns to our discussion, I would simply like to add one comment.
ReplyDeleteA nation's economy is too often defined as the growth in wealth of a nation (which is typically measured by an increase in that nation’s gross national product, and national income).
An economy can grow, however, without benefiting everyone in it. For example, in the 1970s Brazil's economy grew at rates of around 10%, but at the end of that era, the gap between rich and poor had widened significantly.
For this reason, many economists, geographers, and those from the global financial sector are very reluctant to equate economic growth with development, arguing that true development needs to include an serious element of social justice (a critical factor that also has much to do with national and global stability).
Also, in keeping with our host’s original request, I would like to see the world (and therefore accept the challenge myself) foster discussions that are much more holistic in nature.
I believe that should we continue this discussion, it should be done with a much broader consideration in terms of the impact a national economy has on all of its people, but also on the rest of the world (and the overall ecology).
By truly examining the inter-relatedness of such complex systems, I believe we will gain a deeper, more meaningful understanding that might benefit us in many other areas of our life. As Tarah aptly pointed out, we are having a ripple effect. It's time we became intensely aware of it.
Sincerely,
Ellio
As a follow up comment on Ellio's post I just wanted to mention that the gap between the "haves" and the "have nots" in the United States is growing much like it did in Brazil during the 1970's. The gap between the rich and the middle class in our nation (not to mention the then even larger gap between the rich and the lower classes!) is growing increasingly wider according to the most recent statistical data. Also, the rich are getting filthy rich (read "Richistan") and there appears to be absolutely no limit to how much the privileged few in our nation (and world wide for that matter) can acquire without thought of the poor percentage of the population, which, unfortunately, represents the majority of us these days.
ReplyDeleteI am with you, Ellio...I would prefer to see a more universal dialog related to how we can potentially allow for this dismal picture to change....
Lucille has informed me that I have behaved like a pompous ass -- and certainly not for the first time. Nonetheless, I have but a minute as I prepare to catch a flight home and simply wish to state that I have apparently underestimated the desire of your group to have a substantive conversation.
ReplyDeleteUpon my return, I will most certainly answer the questions you have posed, assuming they have been written, as your host suggests, in good faith. While I have no interest in being converted to a state of acceptance regarding a stable state economy and other such theories (which I consider to be inherently flawed since they fail to take into account the realities of human nature and projected population growth), I am very amenable to having an intelligent discussion about sustainable growth. This is an area where I believe we have valuable lessons to share.
If that is acceptable to your gathering, then I look forward to further conversation and shall endeavor more diligently to behave like a gentleman.
Sincerely,
Thomas W.
Thomas, I believe I made our guidelines pretty clear in my previous comment. If you're okay with participating accordingly, we'd love to hear your thoughts on the questions we posed and would certainly invite your "good faith" questions as well.
ReplyDeleteAnd, please, not to worry, no one's interested in converting anyone here or in being converted. We're much more interested in hearing each other's points of view and learning from the wisdom that comes from various vantage points.
Sincerely,
Christopher
I think what Thomas W is saying about the economy I have heard before, it goes like this... And I am making this redundant because too many words don’t simplify the subject as he I believe he is attempting to do.
ReplyDelete"The Western modern business economy has raised more people out of pain and suffering then have ever been raised out of pain and suffering in the history of mankind"
This fact is true and I believe what Thomas W said, in essence is, "And if we, with our bleeding liberal heart views, like this truth or not, it’s still the truth."
But now that I have written what I think Thomas W said., let me respond with a quote from Werner Erhard that might also address this concept:
"What's obvious is what's so, what's not so obvious is that it's also so what!"
So what if it’s the most effective way to manage society, we can't forget about the detail called the working class poor human beings.
Let me keep this simple, because I am a simple man and not a word smith like you. There is so much more, that you will not see with your filtered approach on a god's eye macro view of the economic history of the modern world. You may be able to see the end road, but how much are you missing by only seeing this macro view?
But I guess your point is the micro stuff doesn’t matter.
So, the growth economy model in the long run will help us all as you say, and the micro concepts of making this world a better place, are just ideals that can't be practical in an egotistical human society. This might be true, but I believe that we are capable of so much more, that we can have our cake and eat it too, by living at a higher level and creating a balance that is fair.
I do agree that I am not prepared to live at the level of comfort such an idealistic society would require, but then we may not have a choice, the world’s 5 billion might decide for us.
Regardless of what we think, conservative or liberal alike, if you forget about the have not's they will bite back!
My contributions are small to the world. I make an attempt to do something for the sake of doing it, although, I know the difference is negated sometimes.
ReplyDeleteI stopped my family from watching public or cable TV. I am not stopping them from watching DVD/VHS movies. I know there is programming in all forms of media subtle and obvious. But still, I wanted to stop the madness because I have a background in psychological marketing and I know its power.
I finally quit smoking, although I didn’t really want to. I used all the motivational techniques from my many years of study, but they failed. The truth was I was full of it. But despite my amazing strength to create possibility in other areas, I couldn't achieve the possibility of being smoke free. Alas, Chantix the new drug solved the problem for me. It blocks the dopamine release caused by nicotine thus making me go cold turkey for my own good, despite of my self destructive habit.
We are 99% redundant human robot monkeys (metaphor) I believe, pattern machines, and one percent infinite possibility existing in our declared words that we live into.
So, now I get to not live in the guilt and really start looking deeper into my life where I can make a difference, so I don’t show up as just trying to look good. I have won against my greatest demon, addiction.
So in time I can do more, one step at a time, but I feel these steps create a ripple effect that transform the world. Everything is connected at some level.
All I can do is look in the mirror and attempt to make a difference with me, and then I can look outward as I am strong to contribute to my family, community, country, and world.
Welcome to ThomasGall. We're happy to have yet another voice and perspective in our mix here. I'd also invite those of you who are interested in reading's ThomasGall's post in the previous topic as well as I think it may provide some perspective and context regarding his approach to life.
ReplyDeleteAll the best,
Christopher
Greetings. It may perhaps be my imagination, but I feel as if I must step carefully as I enter, lest I disturb the peaceful surroundings of the "community."
ReplyDeleteTo each of you, who have tendered reactionary responses to my suggestion that a growth economy is a foregone conclusion that yet might actually have some value, if we determine how to manage it -- I will ask you to actually read beyond my apparently condescending tone, and hear what I am actually saying instead of what you believe I represent.
A growth economy is inevitable for two primary reasons: 1) The population (and therefore the demand for goods and services) is growing exponentially; and 2) Human nature, in spite of our desires and wishes, has historically proven itself to be focused on either the immediate self, or one's personal group (family, community, nation, race).
Recognizing the realities of the above two conditions, my view is that rather than deny that growth will march forward, we need to manage growth in ways that care for the well-being of the masses, while not allowing people to shun personal responsibility for their own choices and actions. This is a fragile balance, I realize.
What disturbs me the most, and perhaps others who share my views as well, is when discussions about caring for the masses, devolve into fantasies about the re-distribution of wealth. Anyone having embarked upon an examination of history in the not-too-distant-past will recognize such rhetoric as being the same as that used during the Bolshevik revolution and other such hysterical acts of societal delusion.
Do you really suppose that the corporations and other wealth-holders of today's world will be truly motivated to help solve the issues of this world, if they are threatened with the loss of their earnings and are not rewarded financially for their efforts and the very bona fide risks they take? Do you even begin to think that you are capable of wresting from their clutches, their treasure?
There are ways to solve the issues of the common man, my fellows, without stripping the wealthy of their riches. Such tactics have proven to be short-term at best, and typically succeed and merely replacing one wealthy, privileged class with yet another (typically even more ruthless and less caring than the previous).
As for measures like co-housing, community gardens, co-op purchasing and other remnants of the 60's which seem to have attracted the fascination of aging Boomers, whether you realize it or not, such steps create an infinitesimally small difference in the larger scheme of things. Yes, they may make one feel better about oneself and may even, to a small degree, create a slightly more affordable life style. Why should one object to such choices?
But at the end of the day, all such measures typically are far less sustainable than intended, and -- in spite of the hopes of their participants -- still contribute amply to the growth economy.
So, my question to you is -- what “breakthrough solutions” might this group of geniuses extend to provide the level of balance and sustainability for a growth economy that will most assuredly march forward with or without your permission.
With only the weakest of expectations,
Thomas W.
To Thomas W:
ReplyDeleteHaving a strong opinion is one thing. Feeling the need to be snarky and self-righteous about it is quite another. I'd really like to see a serious dialog take place around this subject, but find it difficult to hope for when you insist on tossing out casual insults and an air of condescension toward the rest of the group.
I have only one other time arrived at this point, but I really am going to insist that if you contribute further you refrain from being the self-proclaimed ass that you seem to be so proud of being.
How about you approach this conversation with the level of respect and diplomacy you would demonstrate if the outcome were critical and you actually needed to establish rapport with your fellow participants. Are you capable of such a conversation? If so, please step up and show the "good faith" that you've implied in your previous comment was in question for us.
Sincerely,
Christopher
Thomas W writes..."we need to manage growth in ways that care for the well-being of the masses, while not allowing people to shun personal responsibility for their own choices and actions. This is a fragile balance, I realize."
ReplyDeleteIf this is all you were saying then I agree, but I did not get this from your previous posts, and I don’t think a conservative, which I guess you are, this is all you intend here.
Thomas W writes..."What disturbs me the most, and perhaps others who share my views as well, is when discussions about caring for the masses, devolve into fantasies about the re-distribution of wealth. Anyone having embarked upon an examination of history in the not-too-distant-past will recognize such rhetoric as being the same as that used during the Bolshevik revolution and other such hysterical acts of societal delusion."
See this is the line the “right” has given the “masses”, and its bull. I realize that we can't and shouldn't go off the deep end with redistribution of wealth like communism, but we also can’t take an Ann Rand approach to total free markets like today.
In the end, the Bush oil industry government will not have helped our economy, except grab the last little bit of oil left on the planet before we are forced to turn to alternate fuels. We are now exponentially, at the rate of 1 billion dollars a second going into debt. And if you know anything about the dollars, it’s heading down fast!
And yes, there is no other energy solutions right now, while the existing solutions don’t meet the demand, in crisis solution present themselves. It’s our apathy and conservative values that have kept everything in check with this ongoing destruction.
An example of forwarding thinking, GM announcement today, using garbage to produce fuel for less then a dollar a gallon, I bet this patent was locked away for more then a couple generation. This type of thinking is coming at a point in history when its clear Saudi Arabia oil is practically tapped out.
Yes, the 60 generation sold out, but that doesn’t mean, now that they are taking power from their dieing World War II Parents, that they will continue to sell out.
Your friend, the Master Trinh suggests that I join your conversing with each other about the topic of economy which I have had some experience in dealing with. So with your permission, I begin.
ReplyDeleteFirst, my colleagues, I observe that Mr. Thomas W. is trying very hard to convince the world that his ideas are sound and without fault. We should be kind to him for he appears to be very insecure in his beliefs. I may be wrong, but please, may we not be too hard on him.
Next, I would like to offer another view of economics and would like to suggest something that will seem most elementary. But my way of thinking always begins at the beginning. This is a very simple approach I realize.
It seems to me that the whole idea of economics is a fable that was constructed to control the flow of goods and services and to make sure that the “owners” of these products are paid their “due”.
In reality, when one looks closely, the idea of price reflects the individual ego’s voluntary decision regarding the height of psychological barrier or resistance to flow of product or services from one to another. The idea of price also suggests that one owns or possesses that thing which will only give to another for such a price. This notion began many, many centuries ago.
But, in reality, time and space, material, energy and ideas (laws of nature) are eternal and without limits. How can anybody own it? Does a farmer own a right on his/her harvests? Did he take any permission to use water, air and sunlight and minerals from earth? Can a teacher claim right on his/her knowledge?
Those who create something like a farmer, saint and scientist have no idea of the prices in early days. They can give things free or don’t give at any price. Emotional resistance to giving is called price. The theory of price thus, is use of discretion in her/his ability to ‘take and give back’ in a universe that is seen as lacking prosperity.
Conventional economics is not derived from policy of abundance. The rules of pricing in such economies are different because they aim to manage 'shortages' by regulating supply-demand. There is a principle: 'a whole is greater than sum of the parts'. And when a 'whole' is divided, every one becomes owner of the parts and remains unsatisfied till all of them regain their whole.
For example, a river is 'whole' or natural undivided reserve for uses of and to be care by all. After people have their own wash-rooms, amount of water then becomes insufficient for all wash rooms. This situation of privatization of water thus creates 'shortages'. This 'shortage' needs a system in place to divide and distribute the river water into several wash rooms. This is a problem before 'economics'. Conventional economics not holistic and thus has the objective to save for minimizing shortages and use measurement in trade of 'parts' of ownership among private owners.
Conventional economics talks about 'supply demand' regulation in order to solve conflicts of distribution. When a 'whole' is cut off into pieces, shortages occur and idea of private ownership is born and idea of measurements gives this division legitimacy. But we must remember that the basic idea of price and economics is something that was created to control and manipulate a divided whole. It was designed to provide privilege for some and, even without intention, poverty for others.
If we can see this simple foundation of how price and dividing the whole has led to the need for “economics”, we can possibly see how simple we must begin to think in order to find our way home to a solution. There is much bigger issue at hand then one may think. One that may be very difficult for us to fully grasp, yet we must keep trying.
I am grateful to participate with you,
Sunjab
Time out.
ReplyDeleteSomehow I allowed the focus of this topic to wander way off into the forest somewhere. As interesting as the conversation around economics may be, what this topic is really designed to ask is:
What is it, you'd like to see the world (i.e. yourself) change, do more of, less of, or do better? What is it that you could do that, without the need to change others, might impact in the most positive way how you experience your life, those in your life, and your circumstances? What is it you could do (or possibly stop doing) to make your life richer, more meaningful to you, and enhance the odds of enriching the lives of those around you as well, should they feel the need to be so enriched?
So, what I'm going to do is set up a second topic around economics, since it's generating such heat, and invite you to continue that discussion in a topic we'll call, "Genius Having an Identity Crisis -- How Economics Might Save/Destroy the World"
For everyone who would prefer to continue our original discussion here, feel free to pick up where we were before the economic surge stormed the room.
Thank you,
Christopher
I declare the possibility of being physically fit. I have hired a trainer, and plan to go to the gym four times a week. Now that I am smoke free, I want to really take a look at what else is missing.
ReplyDeleteIn 1982, when I was 13 years old, I took a course called EST, in it, they told us to look deep into that which we don’t know, we don’t know. This discovery has been blocked for me because of my own failing in quitting smoking. So now that I am free from yet another self imposed illusion that my meaning making self created... I would like to look deeper. I have spent a lot of time looking good. Recently went through the whole motivational seminar the Forum, the new improved EST, without really taking anything on, because I am so skilled at looking good, saying the right thing, but it was BS, and like Werner said, “I was being full of it". This freedom will allow me to spend more time with my family, less time outside in the cold getting sick smoking and really taking on my health which I believe will manifest into many possibilities around wealth, retirement and friendship.
Thank you for re-claiming our safe space, Christopher... Economics is interesting... and pertinent to the larger discussion... but I think the rest of us who were into a different mindset... may have felt like a boisterous bully crashed our gathering.
ReplyDeleteI'm looking forward to hearing more about people's experiences of what's moved them... and what they yearn for and are committing to this year. I'll be adding mine soon as well... as I am now inspired to work them out.
Love is the Only Power,
Jonnie
Out of bounds... wow! This discussion on economics went so far outside the way we normally treat each other... I am very stoked that you carved that out and invited a different tone.
ReplyDeleteAnd that gets down to another insight for me... big time...
The level of discussion and our real ability to... you know... get to the heart of a matter without defensiveness... is something I've been taking for granted here...
As I sat back with my freaking jaw dropped at the kind of comments being made earlier... I realized that it was pretty much the way it often is in the work environment.
No wonder it takes us so long to really solve complex issues... no body listens... no body opens up... everybody wants to have their say.
So... I'm really adding to my list that I want to listen... shut up more... and truly take things in and consider them before launching a response...
I remember Christopher talking to my department about the value of "paradigm shifting" ... being able to truly make the other person's case for them in order to gain understanding...
That's what I'm committing to... you hear me gang... again, please... hold me to it.
Grateful to be in the good space again,
JJ
I have a very sincere question for the group. Why is it that we are not naturally inclined to truly care for each other on this planet? Is it how we were raised? Is it our survival instinct?
ReplyDeleteAs I sat back and watched the debate on economics unfold, and even now as they appear to be finding some new ground together in the new conversation room, I became depressed. Silvio mentioned in his last comment there, that Africa has been ignored because it's not economically significant (or something to that effect).
This takes me back to our last topic -- how do these world conditions reflect upon us personally? What does it say about our human nature?
I'm reflecting on my own actions and becoming very mindful of how I show up in the world -- and I know that's the one place I can control, but when I see the whole planet in this stupor, I cry sometimes.
Does anyone else feel this?
With love,
Shayla
Shayla... we cannot let the burden of this world drag us down with it. Our gift is to see devastation but continue to sow goodness, love, and mercy... and in so doing, be healed as we heal the world, one person at a time.
ReplyDeleteOur prayers, thoughts, and love are with you.
Your sister in peace,
Skye
Shayla,
ReplyDeleteThis is a great question about human motivation. In both of these threads it’s pretty clear that our current state of affairs and economic realities would appear that human beings are just mostly selfish.
I remember reading “The True Virtue of Selfishness” and “Atlas Shrugged” By Ayn Rand. The theme is the role of the mind in man's existence and, consequently, presentation of the morality of rational self-interest. In my youth, in the 80’s, I thought this makes a lot of sense, because you can’t help others until you help yourself. This type of thinking has kept us strong for many generations, helping ourselves, and then sometimes doing something for others. If we look at truly selfless philosophies or religions worldwide, they appear to lack power and are sometimes too weak to help others. The Western tradition clearly has done more at great cost too.
So it would seem that we are just that, mostly selfish, but I don’t think it’s that simple.
If I break it down to an individual level, human beings are very caring, and good people. They don’t want war, they want to make a difference, they hope for a better tomorrow. During World War II, people knew what was going on with the extermination camps of mass genocide, but they often did nothing.
But let’s break it down further, because these big things we talk about are simply much larger then us in some ways. It’s easy for us to with our hind sight, and ability to see the God’s eye view to come up with great ideals and theories as what should or could be done. But human beings as individuals are at best a step above animals, as a group or organization we are very powerful. The group model usually function’s on what’s best for the bottom line, because groups that don’t focus on the bottom line fail to exist in the long run.
So what are we as individuals, we are simple & good people.
The few human beings that get to run major corporations, live lives of extra ordinary possibility. Those few that are in power, come to realize that there is no big conspiracy, that the fact that this whole massive structure of an organization exist, rest more on the chaos theory then on actual human interventions. Its bigger then all of us, and when people study these organizational theories, or economic theories, they come to realize that they can only do so much to transform the world.
But that doesn’t mean we as individuals don’t try, it’s just that the results are often just not as exact as our theories and hopes might expect.
Still the greatest risk of all in life is not to risk, and with faith and a declaration of possibility, great things do happen and transform the world for the better. It starts off as a seed, an idea, then it’s shared with others, and in time, this idea by the law of attraction creates this new world. The outcomes are both good and bad.
Skye and ThomasGall,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your kind words of encouragement. They remind me to shore up my heart and to see the goodness and light in people and in the world.
It's easy to allow the filtered story of life that we see through the slim lens of the media and some of those around to us to present life in a far different perspective than what the two of you have shown me.
Love and Peace to you both,
Shayla
A lovely Saturday afternoon to you all. If you have not read my commentary in the economic section, I would invite you to please do so.
ReplyDeleteNoticing the rather remarkable turnabout that has transpired in this blog, I am most curious as to your experience and the underlying cause that may have brought about this most recent and quite lovely mood change.
Yours truly,
KBF
Dear KBF (and to all of my friends here), please read my response in the more recent topic on economics. It may, perhaps, help you with your own comments.
ReplyDeleteLove,
Shayla
I've been part of this blog family for quite some time... and I am grateful for this gathering place because it's helped me realize that there are many others... who like me... are seeking to live a life that is not caught up in the turmoil... craziness... and anger that is being marketed to us with such persistence.
ReplyDeleteI left my job in nursing because... for me at least... the healing work I had dreamed of doing through that profession... was not welcome... at least not in the way that I performed it. KBF talks about left-brained... I was actually written up for spending too much time with patients... for praying with them when they asked me to... because they were afraid... or alone.
Something I have always known since I was a very young girl... came to full awareness during those times though... and it's why I see the entire experience as a gift. Love heals. There is a power... to use the words KBF suggested... that is transmitted.
But to transmit the power of love... and see a person be comforted... to see them have a remarkable turn-around overnight... to have them leaving the hospital praising God... instead of the doctors... or medicine... that was simply not acceptable to some. In fact... it was objectionable.
I remember being told by my nurse supervisor... after one such "incident"...
"Whatever witchy little things you're doing with these patients... it's going to stop now. You're scaring other patients and demeaning the value of medicine and this hospital."
Those "withcy little things" included sitting in a room... at a patients request... in the middle of the night... where they would share their fears... and then I would show them how we could envelop those fears... and their illness or condition in the Light. By transmitting the Power of Love to them in those moments... and by their receiving it... amplifying it... and allowing it to run through their entire being and breathing it out... and in... they experienced peace... and at times healing on a profound level.
This Power of Love... is available to all of us... to receive and to share. It's what I live for... it's my service to perform.
And to answer your question... KBF... yes... it can be transmitted over distances... beyond time... it is not restricted by the limitations that normally make it challenging for our "little minds."
So this is what I wish to see more of in this world... to have pure Love ripple across the pond of our consciousness... our hearts... and bodies... and minds...
For truly...Love is the Only Power,
Jonnie
Jonnie,
ReplyDeleteYour story touched me because my sister is a nurse and I almost became a psychologist.
I was told not to get my PhD because most of the simple problems of human perception and emotional issues can be fixed in affordable seminars and the real problems that are chemical they have specific drugs that hit the problem dead on, instead of cross spectrum drugs of yesterday.
My sister was frustrated with bachelor level nursing, so she completed her master degree because it’s quite annoying dealing with hospital politics and rules. She is now free, and applying to the Gates Foundation.
While that supervisor nurse might have just been an up tight lady, she is also faced with the reality that if someone sues, because they think your performing psychology on a patient, then you would both be in trouble.
The use of reiki, praying, and creative visualization with gestalt techniques to heal people is well known and works. There are even some progressive hospitals that are using these ways to heal. But with a slow process because we are still in world where lawyers and lawsuits happen too often.
My sister is really enjoying her master in nursing degree now days. She has been to foreign countries and has had the opportunity to make a difference!
Her amazing project is becoming quite something:
http://bednetsforkids.org/gomaproject.html
Jonnie are a special woman ahead of her time who just needs to get her master in psychological nursing so you can practice these powerful gestalt techniques to bring about love and light in your patents minds.
I work with a lady who does just this and has been a blessing for my marriage and family!!
One day, the mainstream insurance and hospitals will know and value your contribution.
THE FOLLOWING COMMENTARY WITHIN THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THIS TOPIC FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE TO MAINTAIN CONTINUITY IN THE ECONOMIC POST AND YOUR CONVERSATIONS HERE.
ReplyDeleteKBF said...
Good afternoon from London town!
As many of you know, I satisfy many of my passions by studying and seeking to understand the nature of creativity and other extraordinary experiences. Well, my fellow bloglings, what I have witnessed over the last several days in this blog certainly qualifies as extraordinary.
The tone and commentary in both of the current topics has gone from one of dispute and, pardon me for saying so, pig-headedness -- to one of rather remarkable respect, kindness, and appreciation.
What is even more startling perhaps is that the two Thomases metamorphosed to such a degree. Thomas W. from one of superiority (and pardon me, Thomas W., for putting words in your mouth) to one of surprise at his own awe; and ThomasGall from a mode of stumbling on his words and of frustration with self and others to one of a pure poet.
In the end, tears are shed, fellow blog members offer comfort and reassurance to one another -- it is the stuff of miracles. And so here is what I am deeply curious to understand.
What is it that changed the tone? Words that another scribed upon our common tablet? (And what prompted such words?) Or is it possible that in addition to words, there was some tangible energy, a spirit of kindness, some might say -- that you also felt as you read the words of some?
It has been theorized by certain research scientists who dance out beyond the edges of Western science, that a literal transmission occurs -- that when received, resonates with the frequency of another soul in such a way that a sympathetic (meaning same or similar) vibration occurs in the receiver and thus changes their experience, mood, and inclination.
Did any of you experience such a shift in your energy upon reading certain words or experiencing the presence of certain contributors? If so, to what do you attribute this change?
Your willingness to share your experience would be most helpful to me (as I too am noticing that even I am writing with an absence of the sarcasm and self-deprecation which normally accompanies most everything I write or say).
With appreciation and respect,
KBF
January 19, 2008 7:25 AM
Shayla said...
My father once told me a story, upon my asking him how, while meditating, he could arrive at such a place of bliss.
"There once was a man," my father said, "Who had a profound realization of unity with all that lives -- creatures, other human beings, plants and trees, even the rocks and sky. With profound gratitude, this man returned to his home with a aura of peace and great joy about his soul.
What has happened to you? questioned the man's father. You look as if you have been in the heavens.
Yes, the man said. I truly have.
Tell us, said the father, how did this happen, for we would like to go their too?
As the man began to explain the nature of his experience, it sounded quite ordinary. He was standing on the sidewalk, looking at the morning light, when he noticed how beautiful the trees were. Suddenly he found himself deeply in love with life and all that encompassed it.
But why did you suddenly feel this, his father demanded to know.
The man did not know, he explained. It was as if a feeling simply came over him.
Ah, so it was merely a feeling, his father said.
No, father, the man protetested, it was more than a feeling. But the more the man attempted to explain how his sacred moment had occurred, the more ordinary his experience began to sound to him -- silly, in fact.
Finally, having slipped from the place of transcendence from which he had been lifted earlier that morning, the man shuffled into the kitchen and poured himself a cup of coffee.
Looking out upon the morning dew, he wondered if he had perhaps been dreaming of the heaven he had briefly visited. For now, it was nothing more than a broken dream that faded away as he sipped his brew.
I am such a fool, the man muttered to himself, shaking his head with shame."
So you see, daughter, my father explained to me, some things are to be experienced, but never explained. For in the explaining, the magic of the moment is lost in translation, seldom to be recovered again.
Thus, our dear KBF, I decline to answer your very sincere request.
With love,
Shayla
January 19, 2008 8:24 AM
thomasgall said...
KBF,
The first Shift occurred for me when Christopher suggested I take another approach with Thomas W,
So I posted this comment to Thomas:
"I realized that I didn’t really listen to your point of view. I’m sorry."
The Second shift occurred for me when Trihn, asked the question and was listening from his heart the following:
"What original insights come to you from the place beyond your mind? What is in your heart? What do you do to change your economy? To create many positive ripples that expand from you outward to others?"
Mr. Erhard says in his seminar to make the point:
"I have never listened, I will never listen, and I am not listening now"
The "Already Always Speaking Voice" which is another name for the ego or vast memory of meanings is going at about 5000 words a minute which doesn’t allow for much listening to occur in human interaction.
In both cases the shift that occurred was one of listening to another from a space of no-thing or without prejudice.
January 19, 2008 9:00 AM
Dot P said...
My Saturdays would not be complete without a cup of coffee, the New York Times, and a dose of the rich dialog that always emerges from this blog.
I've largely relegated myself to the role of a reader, not an active participant (though I suppose one could make the argument that reading is much more active than not). Nonetheless, I could not resist the urge this afternoon to share an observation about the two topics that are currently running simultaneously here.
Being a passionate geek, like KBF, who studies the brain's activity, I can't help noticing that what has been happening repeatedly over the history of this blog is a classic dialog between our two hemispheres (left and right -- linear and holistic).
As Shayla shared the story that her father used to illustrate this point, I had flashback of sorts. Much of what my former team and I did for some time in our studies was to ask people to explain transcendent or mystical experiences. As we proceeded, we began to find something interesting, which initially led us to a prejudgment of monumental inaccuracy.
We found that in explaining their other-worldly moments, people many times became sad and somewhat disenchanted with their own experience. The more they tried to rationally describe these high points of their life, the greater their level of disenchantment with these hallmark moments became.
The conclusion initially reached by our team was that the moments of bliss themselves were not real, but imagined and that these unreal experiences were "merely" the product of the emotional responses generated by the triggering of certain regions within the brain, which then signaled the release of chemicals within the brain and body and thus led to the euphoric, elevated or altered sense of reality generally experienced.
Being quite satisfied with our findings (since they reinforced our then current belief in the superiority of the rational mind and the relative uselessness of the irrational mind and the emotions that accompanied it) we continued testing to further prove our point.
It was during one of those sessions that our flawless trials encountered an exception -- a man from one of the indigenous tribes of Indonesia who had immigrated to the U.S. while in his teens. He was now in his early thirties and was something of an enigma to our group.
This man, rather than surrender to our insistent line of rational questioning, simply recounted his experience to us as a narrative over and over again. Each time we questioned him, he became even more animated and steeped in the emotional essence of his story until his experience became palpable by all in the room. It was as if he was concerned we were not understanding him and wanted to make sure we shared in the nature of his experience.
This disturbed some of our team, who actually became frightened by the energy that seemed to envelop everyone as the man invoked the power of his experience. Noticing this, the man stopped and with a very kind smile, said, "You are afraid, but you don't need to be. You're listening with the wrong mind."
He then went on to explain in a very gentle manner (and I'm paraphrasing, of course) that the "little mind" tries to make sense of everything and place it in a tiny box that so that is fits with everything else in its tiny world. Things that don't fit are thought to be crazy, evil, or wrong. The little mind, he said, wants to be most important thing of all and sees itself as the center of every story.
The “big mind,” on the other hand, cannot be contained, he explained, and lives freely in and amongst all things. The big mind knew everything there was to know, he told us with much enthusiasm, but this could not possibly be understood by the little mind. His people knew this about the littler mind and therefore had learned to laugh at the little mind to help it relax and not be afraid.
Needless to say our experience with this man led to a few epiphanies within our group. And while, I don't know about the terms “big” and “little”, it certainly seems that the linear aspect of our brains and the holistic aspect often have great difficulty with translation. They tend to become frustrated with each other when left in a dualistic environment.
It’s valuable, therefore, to realize that each perspective, each experience we have is as "real" or "unreal" as any other. If we can begin to truly grasp that we are usually looking at life literally through entirely different filters than our neighbor, maybe we will cease our need to invalidate one another's experience and simply expand our thinking from either of our resident hemispheres, to include the whole brain and thus the much broader spectrum of experiences and realities that therein exist.
It is from this place of wholeness, I believe, that the solutions to our crazy world may be found.
A lovely weekend to you all,
Dot P
January 19, 2008 11:02 AM
thomasgall said...
Dot P said...
"It’s valuable, therefore, to realize that each perspective, each experience we have is as "real" or "unreal" as any other. If we can begin to truly grasp that we are usually looking at life literally through entirely different filters than our neighbor, maybe we will cease our need to invalidate one another's experience and simply expand our thinking from either of our resident hemispheres, to include the whole brain and thus the much broader spectrum of experiences and realities that therein exist"
This post has some great insights about our conversations and being human.
I am very interested in human perception and why we can't all just get a long.
The irony is that as much as I come to understand the problems and solutions of human perception and interpersonal relations, I am, forever, still stuck in the box.
I am in the matrix, so I can’t see the bad habits and the situation that cause us/me to assume. Mostly I see the bad patterns in others.
The hardest thing to see is the pattern you create yourself, and if you notice someone else, then it’s very difficult for them to understand what you perceive about them.
In religion, I understand that each religion must say they hold the only truth. There is real power in faith. The white lie is that their religion is the only truth on the planet. This white lie allows people to over come great adversity, and through the law of attraction live great lives.
The greatest shift in history occurred during the protestant revolution. At one time, it was not ok to pray for yourself under the Catholic Church in the middle ages. The protestant revolution said that not only is it good to pray for your self, but if you’re rich, then God is blessing you. I believe this was a huge shift for human evolution. Regardless if God is really helping us, this praying for your self allowed us to program our own subconscious minds. (More on subconscious programming read - Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill) But still we are faced with prejudice and hatred of each other because of the little white lie that faith requires.
I look at religions that teach true spirituality, that we are all one, that we are all part of God, that we are a blessed and returning to God/Life/Energy when we die regardless of which church/temple/religious order we belonged to on earth. These true spiritual teaching don’t have a lot of economic and social power in the western sense. And if we return to Thomas W theory, we would agree that the white lie and modern economics are a necessary evil. But if we measure by the Tibetan Buddhist notion of time and history, then the western tradition is a small portion of history, and their ways will make a difference in the long run, but by a measure of thousands of years.
January 21, 2008 10:53 AM
thomasgall said...
Trinh,
I wrote something last year that wanted to share with you. Its more of the same, in a way, but I love these words so much, I want to put it out there:
Unlimited Possibility with no Expectations, no past or future, no spoon
Everything and Anything can be created with a blank slate, a clearing if you will, we are magic; everything in our lives is a product of the energy we draw towards ourselves. By letting go of the past, forgetting all that you know, you open yourself up to unlimited possibility, your present possibility has nothing to do with anything in your past, and when you create from the space of now, do so with no expectations, this will stop you from moving the future into your past, which will create more past in your present and again stop your creation, by putting the past in your future. Just declare anything in words, then tell it to a friend, then say it to yourself - three times a day for two weeks, then set out to doing it, and everything and anything will become possible for yourself and your life. That’s how the magic works, not by just doing it, but by BE-Do-Having it all! The Be part is an affirmation you tell yourself, it must be done in words that are in the present tense, and with no negative words, this is the power of the subconscious mind, the breathing reactive mind that multi tasks any thought or words like a computer. Dare I say, that below our awareness a miracle occurs that we can not see, that quantum leaps us to this possibility when we create like this, this is the mystery, be in the mystery. We are bio monkey robots, capable of so much, use the power that you are and everything will be yours in this life!
January 21, 2008 12:44 PM
Trinh said...
Thank you, ThomasGall for sharing your insights and method of creating. It sounds as if you are well-practiced at this.
I am curious about several points you raise. My questions are perhaps similar to what BKO asks us:
When you use the word magic, what does that mean to you?
What does having it all mean?
I wonder what is this "all" that I could have?
Is it something I do not already possess?
When one is creating, using the practice you describe, what ensures that what one creates will be in harmony with the force of life and benefit all?
I am most interested in learning about such things and appreciate your patience. But I am not wise for modern ways of thinking, so you will please forgive me if my questions are foolish.
Your kindness is felt by many,
Trinh
January 21, 2008 5:14 PM
thomasgall said...
Trinh,
Again you challenge me with questions, which teach me more then I may answer with my simple words.
Obviously, these concepts that I put forth are Zen in nature, and thus there is no need.
But it’s my ego that puts them forward, and it’s my ego that doesn’t need them.
But still, I do not choose to live in a Buddhist retreat or meditate; rather, I choose to do a sort of walking meditation, while I choose to live in the material western world.
So to answer your question:
Trihn ask, “I am curious about several points you raise. My questions are perhaps similar to what BKO asks us:”
Trihn ask, “When you use the word magic, what does that mean to you?
-- To me life is magic, simple life. We are given things from life/God/energy/law of attraction but it’s not obvious. We can’t create or wish for something and it magically appears. To me the magic occurs below our obvious awareness. The magic is obvious to the subconscious mind, but not to the conscious mind. Magic to me is that in the face of being an automatic pattern machine human being, which is what science tells us our behavior is, that with words we are able to create new possibility. Animals have learned to stay the same; an alligator for example has learned that to stay a certain ways means it will survive for millions of years. But humans, because of language are very different, and are able to create new possibilities from nothing.
Trihn ask, “What does having it all mean?”
--When I desire, I enter into the chain of suffering, so maybe its better not to desire or seek to have it all. But since I am living in the western world, I do choose to have some basic things like a home, cars, clothes, ect…
Trihn ask, “I wonder what this “all” that I could have is?”
-- All is whatever you wish to have it be, and is never the same, always changing. I know that reaching for having it “all” is a bit of an illusion, but as long as I enjoy the journey along the way of reaching for it “all”, or that which I currently want, I might enjoy the ride.
Trihn ask, “Is it something I do not already possess?”
-- you possess everything you need and you don’t need more, but if life stop you from getting what you want, then you must find out where the block occurs and release yourself from any limited thinking that might tell you, that you can’t have what you want. In the west we believe, often, in our limitations, and we create beliefs system that say we are not strong enough, smart enough, and/or good enough. These limitations are not the truth, and the process I put forward is one to let go of these illusions, let go of the past, and open once self up to possibility without the restraints the past as imposed on our present possible future.
Trihn ask, “When one is creating, using the practice you describe, what ensures that what one creates will be in harmony with the force of life and benefit all?”
-- Only your nature and choice to be good will ensure this, but maybe you will not. I wanted to give my children a great Christmas, but choosing this cost the planet and had consequence I can’t begin to imagine, not to mention 1000 dollars out of my pocket.
January 21, 2008 6:29 PM
Trinh said...
Thank you, ThomasGall, for explaining what magic means to you. But you are far too kind and count too much wisdom to this old man. Truth is Trinh has turned back into a child whose curiosity for life is great because he knows so very little.
If it is not too much trouble for you, I am now most interested in your understanding of language and how it makes humans different from other creatures and allows them to create things from nothing.
How does language make things so that were not so before words were spoken? What is this no-thing from which new possibilities are created?
I am also curious about the language of all living creatures. Animals are able to learn human language and this seems most remarkable. Seeing this, silly Trinh has always believed that animals speak their own languages too.
Is it possible that the language of the creatures is simply beyond our human understanding?
Last two questions, if you will indulge me.
What is this life that stops a person from getting what they want?
And, you’re a most generous, ThomasGall, does this old poem mean what you say about past, future, and present?
“What is the past, but a dream of a today long past?
"What is the future but a longing for a today not yet come?
And so, my child, if we live in the present, dreaming of a past, longing for a future, will not all our pasts and futures be merely dreams of longing for a time other than now?
"For this reason, live in the now -- in this very moment -- for in it you will find the life that makes all things -- past, present, and future -- move in perfect harmony with the heart of all that is.”
Thank you for your kindness,
Trinh
January 22, 2008 9:50 AM
Nyguen said...
"The language of the heart knows no words and needs them not, for it speaks only the language of love."
*******
"When the heart sings, all of life listens and joins in the song of creation."
January 22, 2008 9:59 AM
thomasgall said...
Trinh,
This is a big conversation…I will do my best to explain, I am not sure I am up to this…
The difference between animal and human brains because of language.
Trinh asks, “If it is not too much trouble for you, I am now most interested in your understanding of language and how it makes humans different from other creatures and allows them to create things from nothing. & how does language make things so that were not so before words were spoken? What is this no-thing from which new possibilities are created?”
--Humans have created language which is beyond that of animals. I will explain more about animals later. Human beings have higher brain functioning. We have the ability to contemplate God or double negative concepts, and metaphors. Animals have no need to contemplate God; they probably are God or more in touch with God then us. I believe we are God’s creation, and with the words we create the world.
-- The human brain is a chemical pattern machine; our brains make neural network patterns. If I tell you to stand up and spin around and walk out the door, you are not doing that in action, you are accessing patterns and the pattern machine that is you automatically does that action. You, the thing that you call yourself exists in language and only in the present moment. If you declare a possibility that transforms (changes) your life, at that moment you are creating and you exist. The moment you declare the possibility and begin to be that new thing, the pattern machine takes over and its no longer you.
-- “All truth is a construction, through our language and senses we create this construction and then strive to understand it, this reality we have created. Nothing we can know exists outside of our language, so yes truth exists exactly as we created it and refashioned it through new thoughts and associated words we have attached to those thoughts. Of course we observe through scientific method (a method we created with symbol systems through language) truths about the way matter behaves, truths about the essences we have distilled through our symbol systems, but ultimately truth is in constant motion just as our representations of what we see and how we make sense and truth of what we see is in constant motion. Truth is not static; it is fluid and moving as we move through our world. That is not to suggest that truth is relative or situational-although it can be-if we create it and define it and change it then it has existence, but an existence that is tied to our culture, beliefs, language, senses, and our morality.
How does G-d fit into such a model or truth? Only G-d knows, and if there is a fixed and unchanging truth perhaps it shall be revealed one day in a way outside of language or better put, not destroyed by language and the misunderstandings that are inherent in a man-made system of thought boxed in by words..”
--“We need to make a distinction between the claim that the world is out there and the claim that truth is out there. To say that the world is out there, that it is not our creation, is to say, with common sense, that most things in space and time are the effects which do not include human mental states. To say the truth is not out there is simply to say that where there are no sentences there is no truth, that sentences are elements of human languages, and that human languages are human creations.
Truth cannot be out there -- cannot exist independently of the human mind--because sentences cannot so exist, or be out there. The world is out there, but the descriptions of the world are not. Only descriptions of the world can be true or false. The world on its own--unaided by the describing activities of human beings--cannot. --Kuhnian”
-- “The most important thing about language is not the way it refers to the exact world of facts, but how all the things that it says relate to all the other things that it says. Word meanings in language depend not on what the words refer to, but on the way words relate to one another. I think the rules of language do not reflect an ideal logic, but are part of the way language works. They do not exist outside of language. I don't think we can know anything outside language since language is all we have to think with. Basically what I'm saying is language does not depend on ideal rules of logic but simply on what people agree language means. We can't get outside of language in order to say what the truth really is. Any attempt to think about reality apart from language has to be done with language, so we can never get to that "reality". Plus, all language is shared by at least 2 people. There's no such thing as one's own language. We've all heard someone say "he has his own language", but in true reality it cannot be so.”
Trinh asks, “I am also curious about the language of all living creatures. Animals are able to learn human language and this seems most remarkable. Seeing this, silly Trinh has always believed that animals speak their own languages too. “
Animals are pattern machines, they have at best emotional intelligence which is quite amazing, but emotion is not as agile at adapting to new situations as our human consciousness created by our language. I don’t know enough about Animals to go into detail here, only what I have heard, you will have to research it to understand it further.
Trinh asks, “Is it possible that the language of the creatures is simply beyond our human understanding?”
-- Yes, all things are possible. There is what we know, and what we know we don’t know, but there is a whole other area of knowledge which is very large and it’s that which we don’t know we don’t know. We don’t know a lot about many things, and even that which we think we know, we have very limited insight. Actually, every given thing and moment in reality I believe is beyond our capability to fully know.
-- “There may or may not be an absolute truth to the universe. Regardless, the answer to that question is ultimately unknowable by humans. Anyone that thinks they can/do know is severely hampering their ability to decipher any facet of what I like to call the Big Cosmic Riddle. The great paradox of knowledge is this... Every conclusion both eliminates possibilities and generates at least two more questions. Therefore, every time we "know" something we narrow our view and create more things that we don't know. Personally, I would much rather play in the infinite possibilities of the Great Mystery, and stick to knowing the only thing that I can be absolutely certain of; I know nothing. Don't take my word on it by any means. You're reading the work of one who knows nothing.”
January 22, 2008 12:17 PM
thomasgall said...
ReplyDeleteContinued....
-- Socrates said, "The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Trinh asks, “What is this life that stops a person from getting what they want?”
The life that stops us from getting what we want is the person who keep putting their past beliefs experience into their present situation, stopping them from being able to get what they want. An example of this is someone who decides they are lazy, and that conversation stops them from going out and getting in physical shape.
Trinh asks, “ThomasGall, does this old poem mean what you say about past, future, and present?”
--Yes! that is a beautiful poem and speaks to what I am learning.
“Am I a man dreaming I am a butterfly?”
1. Your past has nothing to do with your present possible future
2. Your future has nothing to do with you present possible future
3. Only now creates everything, be in the now
January 22, 2008 1:41 PM
Christopher -- Trinh is often a trouble maker who directs conversation in many directions. This is not helpful. You are kind to allow me to remain in blog.
ReplyDeleteThomasGall -- thank you for taking time to answer my questions. You have made my holiday away from working most enjoyable. I return home now, with many new perspectives.
You also graciously shared very detailed view of your thinking that opens up a vista of the intricacies of the human mind. Most fascinating.
It is said that it is a wise man who shows us that the mind's perception is merely a myth -- a marvelous abstract painting of a reality that only can be known by the person who forms such a view in their mind. We humans are truly unwitting artists of our own perceptions.
You seem most passionate about sharing your insights. It is not fair of me to ask, but please keep following this path for the sake of humankind. For it would appear that we need to be reminded in our practice that life must laugh with fascination at our belief that we are somehow separate from the rest of life -- more important -- that life is actually about us and the stories we create in our silly heads.
Your words also seem to tell us too that it is this very dance of illusion that entraps many into believing that the world is as we see it and is something real to be believed in at all costs and held tightly with ferociousness of a lion. Perhaps we awaken one day and laugh with life at the beautiful foolishness of our dream.
ThomasGall, I found this paragraph you have written to be very powerful:
"The great paradox of knowledge is this... Every conclusion both eliminates possibilities and generates at least two more questions. Therefore, every time we "know" something we narrow our view and create more things that we don't know. Personally, I would much rather play in the infinite possibilities of the Great Mystery, and stick to knowing the only thing that I can be absolutely certain of; I know nothing. Don't take my word on it by any means. You're reading the work of one who knows nothing.”
Perhaps it is for this reason you speak of, that after so many years, Trinh is like a young child, a beginner at life who knows nothing, and is so often in awe of life and, as you say, the Great Mystery.
I look forward to exchanging more thoughts with you.
With much gratitude,
Trinh
Trinhn,
ReplyDeleteAgain you honor be with your exchange of conversation. I am almost 40 years old this year and have come to appreciate how little I know, although I am still, a passionate genuis stuck in my youth full of dreams of transforming my life and in doing so, transforming the world.
As I grow older, and have followed this path of discussing enlightenment and helping others realize thier illusions, I slow down, and smell the flowers and laugh more often!
I can only know that I was blessed to have been given this chance to dance in life in this moment in time.
As I look at my children, I am filled with so much joy and am amused at what delussions they will follow in their time as I have done.
Laughing out loud.
Best,
Tom (Moki, Moshe) Milvile Gallagher
Pictures of the great mystery:
http://www.monkeyview.net/id/2164/index.vhtml
Trinh... and ThomasGall... I'm not going to let something slide... that in the past I would have... and maybe I’m impertinent for butting in... or out of line for jumping in on your conversation... but... Trinh... you know it's where I am right now.
ReplyDeleteThis whole conversations about humans and our "special" nature because we have "language" and therefore cognitive thought and the ability to ponder our own existence... while seemingly valid as it applies to humans is utterly un-provable in terms of any other species not having this same ability… or perhaps an even greater ability in this regard.
There is soooo much we do not understand about the workings of the brain... let alone the vastness of the mind which... we are now finally beginning to acknowledge in Western science... exists throughout the body... that we cannot continue to propagate the destructive, self-indulgent, and fallacious myth that animals do not have cognitive abilities... or feelings... or that they do not have beliefs.
A growing number of studies are demonstrating just the opposite... and as you coyly suggest almost subliminally... my dear friend Trinh... it is a myth of our own creation that we humans are the "superior" species.
ThomasGall, I think you came closest to the truth when you said animals need not contemplate God because they do not experience themselves as separate from God or life.
Until we begin to take ourselves off our self-appointed pedestal... and re-join the rest of the life forms on this planet as an integral and equal part of the magnificent organism called planet earth... I believe we are in peril of continuing to lead the charge toward our own extinction and an unconscionable level of "collateral damage" to countless other species.
At the end of the day... it is entirely possible that we will discover that our seemingly sophisticated language skills are nothing more than an over-developed tendency toward mental masturbation that merely distracts of from being present to this very moment and the ineffable... indefinable glories of Life.
If my rant has offended anyone... you'll have to realize that I had my mind and soul blown wide open a month or so ago... and I just don't have the social filter that I used to have.
And I still love you all fiercely,
JJ
JJ, you go girl! It wasn't that long ago that the commonly held belief was that women, due to their highly emotional nature, were incapable of rational thought and thus affairs of the state and of business were suited for men only.
ReplyDeleteFor similar reasons, just a century ago, children were said to be property of their parents with no rights. It is utterly ironic, given this conversation, that children were originally protected in this United States, under the No Cruelty to Animals Act since there was no such provision protecting human children from the many atrocities that were at times carried out on them.
Whomever hoists themselves to a position of power, typically creates a superstructure of beliefs that rationalizes their own misdeeds and injustices by characterizing themselves as the superior creation of a god who built the entire universe just so that "superior" race, gender, or species could reign supreme.
As Mr. Trinh says, it's an utter delusion. Time we wake up and get over ourselves before life slaps us up side the head so hard that we can't get up. We'll then find ourselves wishing that the No Cruelty to Animals Act applied to us.
With sincerety,
Tarah
JJ and Tarah,
ReplyDeleteI agree that animals and women are more intelligent then us men.
Actually, women have more ability to perceive reality and remember it in more detail then men.
I do think that we have something for better or worse that is unique compared to animals. And its our unique opportunity to make a difference in the world because of this language.
"This is the true joy in life, the being used for a purpose recognized by yourself as a mighty one; the being thoroughly worn out before you are thrown on the scrap heap; the being a force of Nature instead of a feverish selfish little clod of ailments and grievances complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy."
--George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman, Epistle Dedicatory
ThomasGall,
ReplyDeleteI understand how you might have easily taken my comments as being a testimonial against men, but that was not my intent. I was actually referring to human beings (including both genders and those in between) as the problem.
Perhaps because of what we humans have come to call our ego -- or perhaps because of the double-edged sword presented by the way our minds work -- we have grown, as you suggest, in our capacity to do enormous harm or enormous good for this planet.
But it is our blinding hubris; the seemingly unsatiable belief in our superiority; and the unrelenting sense of our own importance in the overall scheme of things that has led us, as a species, to render great harm to our environment and each other.
As others have aleady passionately voiced in this blog, it is time for us to value our differences, rather than condemn them, and learn to utilize our complimentary aspects in tandem -- as Christopher has advocated with our organization for some time.
If we have the wisdom and humility to do so, it is possible that we might gain the combined strength that is available to us to enable us to see more clearly, act more sanely, and create outcomes that bless this world instead of damming it to a fate none of us would consciously wish upon our children.
Men, women, humans, other animals, and the underlying biology of our econsphere are all marvelous aspects of this world. I am simply not willing to play the old games that make it seem otherwise -- that one is more important than another. For by doing so -- or sitting by silently as other do the same -- we compromise the integrity and authenticity of every group and of all of us as a wholly vital system.
Enough said. I'll get off my damned soap box now and let the rest of y'all speak.
Best wishes and good night,
Tarah
ThomasGall, I absolutely love the quote you provided from George Bernard Shaw... you've become a cool part of our blog family... Happy to have you along for our ride through the cosmos.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm totally on with Tarah's comments... we're not about dissing men... or putting ourselves above anybody else... though I'm sure we do it all the time... but hopefully this is a place where we can encourage each other to be a better version of ourselves than we might be left to our own little delusionary view of the world.
Rock on!
JJ
P.S. CH thank you for saving me from myself... I owe you one.
Well, it's that time again -- when we've had a really productive conversation on a topic that leads to a call to transition to another.
ReplyDeleteSo please add your future comments to our new topic, "Genius Changing -- Transformation -- Stepping Through the Door"
We also still have an active topic on the critical underpinnings of our economy as well, so please join in -- it is your thoughts that keeps this whole wheel turning.
Many thanks!
Christopher