by rune 160 Replies latest jw friends
Sorry Ross ... I didn't see your last post ... (it happen)
ok ... Well this is what I like with you (I believe that you really do care) I've messed up more than once myself (and not really willing people to point it out ... and maybe because of pride ... I'd rather do it myself.
To me the story is closed ... Just cause you just came back friendly and open, that's enough (for me) to be happy with that .
kitties and horses,
I can understand how you can perceive that I am attacking or insulting Rune, even though that is not my intention. You are absoluttely right that I do not know Rune well enough to diagnose him with any specific disorder. Nor am I a psychiatrist.
IMO we all have tendencies that lean towards the "borderline personality disorder" traits that I have experienced in people, but some display these tendencies more than others. It is basically a disorder where we can't seem to admit that we have made a mistake. Quite a few posts ago I invited Rune to Google it and see if he felt that any of it applied to him. I got no response on it so it is up to him as to what he does about that.
Regarding this topic of his, though, I will say it a different way than how I have, since I seem to have given people reason to think that I am attacking him. Throughout this topic he has told people that they are seeing things the "wrong way" constantly. If he truly wants a debate, this is not the best way to go about it.
I'll give you an example:
Big Tex said: Actually what I said was, "The beginning of wisdom is the recognition of how little one actually knows."
Rune responded with: Recognizing how little you actually know != deciding you know nothing, ok.
That is not what Big Tex said. Big Tex was making a point that most here would agree with. Basically being close-minded like even he humbly admitted to 20 years ago, we eventually realize that our ABSOLUTE reality was in fact flawed. Instead of acknowledging Big Tex's intelligent observation Rune replied with a comment that was not even accurately describing BT's viewpoint.
Big Tex responded with: Little does not equal nothing. Wisdom does not equal knowledge. Life, the universe and the restaurant at the end of it is not a list of facts and figures. thus clarifying his viewpoint to Rune.
Instead of admitting that he, whether intentionally or not, twisted BT's viewpoint Rune responded with this: You knew? Then perhaps you should not be so full of conviction. I 'know' facts and figures, knowing full well that they are not 100% absolute. You are just stressing the word to the point where knowing means you have no consideration for the validity of the information being off. That's silly.
The end result was that they both agreed that nothing is absolute. However, that was BT's viewpoint all along. Rune decided to tell BT that he was wrong first and then agree, never having admitted that his original assessment of BT's viewpoint was innacurate or the risk of being absolute, Rune was just WRONG.
I have absolutely no ill will towards Rune, I am simply trying to make an observation that I quite frankly feel is valid and may even help him. I don't really know Big Tex at all either, other than reading his posts for slightly longer than Rune's. My own involvement in this topic thrown neatly aside for the moment, from my observation of the thread, Big Tex has a healthier outlook on life than does Rune. Intelligence or debating abilities thrown aside as well, if I wanted advice on any situation I would go to Big Tex first, based solely on the discussion in this topic.
Rune can take my observation as being completely irrelevant or he can take it to heart. Only he will truly know which of these happens. Or will he?
Before anybody suggests that this post is off topic, the Big Tex/Rune discussion displays in itself my answer to his question of "Why? Why? WHY???": Because we never really ever know the absolute answer. Our perceptions will change all the time but the journey to ATTEMPT to find the answers is a better ride when we are AWARE of this same life lesson repeated to us constantly. Our willingness to accept it as a life lesson has a direct correlation to how well we adjust to the journey.
Brad
LittleToe:
FormerOut rightly pointed out that some of us avoid using "absolutes" - remember we've all been part of the JW's too, and have tasted that particular bad apple.
Actually, if you've been reading my posts carefully, I've been saying this all along too? No one is speaking in absolutes; at least, not me. I have already stated that anything I make a statement upon is just how I see it being the most likely way it is - I never intend it to be absolute. Isn't this how anyone throws ideas out though? Therefore, if you follow this point, even mentioning anything you say isn't absolute is completely pointless and irrelevant since it should be assumed by the reader...that is, unless it's a belief.
Sometimes there's more growth to be had by being given the next step, rather than having it all laid out.
It is pompous and arrogant to think that anything you say simply won't be understood by who is listening. Furthermore, this is a forum, and the ability to post gives you almost unlimited capability to state your opinion in complete detail from start to finish, so this is no excuse for not laying out your ideas in full.
The very nature of being a "believer" on an exJW discussion forum is fraught with all sorts of peril, the greatest one being the accusation of proselytization. For that reason I rarely "go there", and was quite happy to overlook this thread as I've contributed to more than my fair share in the past and get tired of coming out with all the same reasonings to a fresh batch of posters.
Ok, if you won't contribute meaningfully, then don't post. You're turning formerout on.
I'm talking about having a personal brush with the "Divine", which can involve the senses I mentioned but goes far deeper.
Please define what 'goes far deeper' means in this case. Remember, it is more than the senses - something else - so please don't be circular by making sensory stimulation the primary method of explaining what this 'brush with the "Divine"' feels like. (Just to be clear and avoid a bunch of clarification posts as we've had to endure in the past.)
You can't prove that I have or have not.
See, the thing is, no needs to prove you have not. The burden of proof falls on the person making the claim.
There are others that claim such an experience and by comparing notes we can come to the conclusion that we "have", but there's no real way of proving this to someone who has not.
And it's impossible and far less likely that you are all just saying it because you are all self-convinced/deluded? Think logically for a moment and pretend you're anyone who doesn't make the claims you do. What sounds more likely? I assume this will just lead to the 'oh you have to experience it to even recognize it exists if you are a rational person' argument. When a dishevelled crazy man runs up to you on street spewing gibberish about his relationship with the moon, do you believe him? Yes, the possibility always exists (albeit infintesimally small), but the likelihood is that he is deluded. You are not a raving bum, nor are most believers in new age or mainstream faiths. But does that make the claims any more believable simply because a group of well-to-do citizens believe it?
What about those with spiritual beliefs that contradict yours? Do you rule them as 'correct' too? Doubtful, since you say the "Divine" exists. You would then require proof of their belief to change your ideas. Do you understand this whole "burden of proof" idea?
This is one reason that even ancient spiritual literature has such a fascination to the "believer", because in it they see a reflection of some of what they too have experienced.
That statement is too vague. The Bible, for instance, is a collection of stories from the creation of the world, to the tyranny of God, to the discrimination/murder/rape of many peoples, to a downright acid trip at the end. Oh and there's morals in there somewhere. A small part may reflect the actual experiences of the believer, what about the rest? This statement is incomplete. It needs detail to even be considered properly.
It enlarges their understanding.
Or, it reinforces their conviction by: 1) giving them a shared text that many other believers will tote as true, 2) give them more ideas to adopt and phrasings to interpret than what they could come up with on their own, 3) teaches them to think more like how the book tells them to, whether by example or outright declaration
It's a form of gnosis wherein you're trying to get me to describe the indescribable, for which we might arrive at some common symbols and nod our heads at each other, but to answer your question to your satisfaction would likely prove impossible.
Indescribable? Isn't it convenient all of this belief stuff is completely inaccessible to those who won't begin by openly giving up logic? Funny thing...it makes for a pretty airtight shell to protect the illogical from a logical thinker. Golly, because if it was even the slighest bit describable maybe we could compare it to something, or make it out to be something other than brushing the "Divine".
It's as frustrating for the believer and unbeliever alike.
It's really not frustrating at all. It's pretty clear what's most likely going on here. Perhaps if you could answer each and every argument in here with something to knock them over we could start with a little frustration.
formerout:
You make so many unfounded statements about me. I think you are still missing my bigger point.No listen, I don't need the pop psychology. Stop it, and stop denying saying things like they aren't permanently written into the thread. It is up to me to tell people to stop polluting my thread with rambles about my personality and writing style that doesn't relate to my questions. I started the thread. Make your own thread about "rune's terrible mind that hurt my tender feelings and drove me insane" if you feel the need to post on this.
God does not exist exclusively outside of you.
How do you know? And where is he/she/it?
He exists as a part of your being as well.
Oh, your God is a male. Interesting a divine being needs a gender. Since we're on the topic of strict monotheism now (I don't recall starting a thread only about God and Christianity), why do you think your God has a penis? If you're going to assign God a gender, wouldn't it make more sense to pick it as female, since females give birth? You do believe God made the universe after all, do you not? Men just ... well I'm sure you know. If God is genderless, then why not use neutral/neuter pronouns - it, itself?
So do emotion and many other personality traits exist within you.
So what? Does this relate to your God being present? You make your distinction between God, and emotions/personality traits very clear here.
As much as you try to suggest that you are the only one here who is capable of separating emotion from this debate, from what I have seen I think the opposite is true. You have not acknowledged a single point that I have made regarding emotion being a very part of our spirit and therefore impossible to be left out of debate.
Wait a minute, I thought you were going to relate this to the topic questions? You just start rambling about me again. I have no suggested I am the only one separating emotion from this debate, I have really meant to infer the ones who are guilty of it so far - mainly, LittleToe and you. If you want to make a point about emotion being a part of your spirit, you need to:
- Define spirit and prove we have one, demonstrating it consists of many parts of the things that are thought by others inside our brains ( by the way, if your brain & nervous system don't perform tasks like emotion, what exactly are they for? )
- You still need to prove why it's impossible to be objective in a debate. Just because you aren't able to do it doesn't mean others aren't. I have seen some fine examples in this thread besides myself. I'm not going to be an apple polisher and kiss everyone's bum just to make a point to you though. It's pretty obvious to all who prefers to make serious points that sound valid (for example, backed up with various points/examples from their experience that sound reasonable) and who wishes to express only what they feel. As I have stated numerous times, this thread is not intended for the latter. Answering my questions with, "oh um people are mystical because they love" for instance provides me with...what? Nothing to think about. There needs to be a detailed thought for something to even be considered, not even argued. Most of the opinionated baseless posts have had some substances that flounders in 'oh you'd never understand' for one reason or another. If I won't understand, then it won't help me or anyone foreign to those ideas think will it? You need to back up what you say.
Yet you do make denigrating comments about people 'flaunting their own qualities'. Denial does not eliminate the actual evidence; quite often it only reinforces the fact that the person has some character flaws, which IMHO should be addressed as a part of this exercise of yours. qualities'. Denial does not eliminate the actual evidence; quite often it only reinforces the fact that the person has some character flaws, which IMHO
........................You realize I was asking for the actual evidence you say I was denying here? Perhaps I am making a mistake even replying to you. You don't sound as though you understand my English very well. Maybe my dialect is too strange.
frenchbabyface: As much as this is going to sound like a grudge of some sort - it doesn't matter if he comes back with open arms apologizing. I was never angry or upset with LittleToe. I imagine now, though, my posts are bleeding with the annoyance of having to repeat myself countlessly. I didn't want friendships to be built or destroyed with this post. I just wanted an objective discussion. I am beginning to take this as proof some (not all) people just can't argue objectively.
formerout (again ...):
I can understand how you can perceive that I am attacking or insulting Rune, even though that is not my intention. IMO we all have tendencies that lean towards the "borderline personality disorder" traits that I have experienced in people, but some display these tendencies more than others. It is basically a disorder where we can't seem to admit that we have made a mistake. Quite a few posts ago I invited Rune to Google it and see if he felt that any of it applied to him. I got no response on it so it is up to him as to what he does about that.
Right... Um, as for that Big Tex example? It was obvious I was wrong? As far as I know most of us are all adults reading this forum. If it will make you feel better though you can print out a banner saying 'RUNE WAS WRONG' to hang on your wall. I won't take offense to that either. Judging by the condescending tone and use of winking smileys I assume the rest means you were rather pleased about this. Congratulations :D I have to admit your post made me laugh. I never intended to say we should all become emotionless robots btw, just when it comes to making posts and arguing them, even with a condescending tone, one shouldn't take personal offense to it. That's all? What would be the point of meaning we should rip the emotion 'from our spirit' or whatever... lol.
Whew!! I was wondering when he was finally gonna snap.
If you want to make a point about emotion being a part of your spirit, you need to:
- Define spirit and prove we have one, demonstrating it consists of many parts of the things that are thought by others inside our brains ( by the way, if your brain & nervous system don't perform tasks like emotion, what exactly are they for? )
- You still need to prove why it's impossible to be objective in a debate.
I think you just did.
Brad
Rune:
Actually, if you've been reading my posts carefully, I've been saying this all along too?
Actually... I was explaining MY actions. There was no accusation in there for you to answer to.
It is pompous and arrogant to think that anything you say simply won't be understood by who is listening.
Actually.... it's realistic.
Most communication is misinterpreted.
For example, your last post may likely be being misinterpreted by me, but to be honest it sounds like you are completely "up" yourself. Isn't it just as pompous to presume that everyone else is deluded and that you're exempt?
Ok, if you won't contribute meaningfully, then don't post.
Actually... the post is meaningful, it just appears that you can't comprehend it too well, especially when I started by clearly explaining that I was giving you three reasons why I don't always come right out with what's on my mind, before then taking up one of your points.
I'll make the following very clear for you:- IMHO your method of communication is abrupt, antagonistic, argumentative, and comes across as insincere. You aren't exactly a "joy" to have a dialog with (in fact it's more like a series of monologues) as you strut around demanding what people must tell you.
The last time I took orders (barring from my boss) was when I was in the WTS, but for once I'll make an exception by taking your advice and not posting further, since you appear to view all that I have to say as "meaningless", inadequate to your needs, stuff you already know which we can't possibly have thought about before, and something that I'm somehow obliged to prove (when you were the one barging in here with all the questions).
I'll finish by offering you some advice which you are completely at liberty to disregard:
Go read some of the posts by REM, FunkyDerek, and Logansrun, to see that much of what you are asking has already been asked by them. They got a better response, though, despite using robust language. You might like to ponder on why that was.
Sincerely: All the best
Edited to add: I've just realised what company you're running with (xochsi )
It potentially explains why you might be so antagonistic.
Rune,
The reason why I can understand you is maybe because obviously in some matter we are alike ... Means I don't care the how and the who, I care the why (on the biggest scale related to the topic) ... but then again when people get personnal (there why's are related to there feelings and we can't go further).
But lets get back to the subject why I feel it is very important (and also related to what happen here, the way people reacted to the topic and your ways). just to sumerise cause we all know what will follow here :
People needs to dream, its a part of us (a capacity that can help to escape reality and even to create reality when what we dream of is possible). The purpose of life and love, sound to be the basis of every religion ... so why do we need religion ? cause we all live and love ... But then when it became more than a philosophy people do stand on the purpose of life (when it could be only living for the best), and tend to forget about love :
When religion nor communautarisme get's in the way this is what you get = DIVISION (that's what those who built them wanted = keep the flock in there hands) ... but really can we be divided on that simple question when its about religion for instance : DO WE KNOW IF ANY GOD DOES EXIST FOR REAL OR NOT ? Not YET !!! No proof !!! So why should we be divided on this ? Because somebody told us so ? Because we believe (anyonce right) that doesn't mean that they can't be objective on the fact that there is NO PROOF and no reason to state that there is a PROOF then ...
Now when you think about why people get into religion it is most related to :
But what does it change to keep our special belief for ourself, and just live and love ? Why do we have to fight for something that we are not sure about ? Cause from what we really know by now, it only had one purpose ... and it doesn't help the followers and the chasers ... but only those who are living on the followers beliefs (as money winners on the biggest scale and or controle freak on every scale).
Now about division / and biased feelings as it is exactly what religion really brought into everybodies life as we are all interdependant on this planet ... we won't be able to really get what we all need (universal communion and objectivity to get into real unconditionnal love on the biggest scale ... that could be the only way to fair with everybody and forget about this biased unfair system that we are living on since so long which is not fair and allow too much people to cheat, and get allong with it ... FOR NOTHING GOOD ... but troubles, nor pain, nor hate ... )
Unconditionnal love (on the biggest scale) should mean that everybody should be on the same level / and should be treated the same way for the same objective reason ... (Is there any reason to act any other way ? Personnaly I don't think so. If my I found out that my son is a killer ... I would send him to jail myself ! Even if it would obviouly break my heart ...
Also unconditionnal love doesn't mean uncontionnal support (wrong is wrong / bad is bad / good is good and that's were religion and communautarisme, personnal feeling for somebody in particular, and and and ... doesn't help to be objectif about).
Take an example : a JW father do abuse sexually his daughter or son ... but because nobody care the kid and needs to appear good witness they will deny the kid being a victime and still shake the guy's hand and still give him respect (even if he didn't apologise or still deny and that the kid still have to struggle with the issue) ...
It's all about appeareance ... WHERE IS GOD ACTUALLY HERE, WHO IS GOD IN THERE MIND HERE ?
WHERE IS THE REAL THING ????
... this subject is really THE SUBJECT !
Dear Rune,
I decided to reread your original post and give you my opinions - not great knowledge, but here goes. You said you don't want a response that will satisfy you, and I'm sure I won't provide one, but here's what I think:
1) Why do people need to believe in mystical stuff? For instance, no matter how much proof you think you have, no matter how much you believe what you've picked as correct or what you want to be true, there is no way you can know how the universe came to be, what humanity's united purpose is (if any, doubtful), where we are going, or what we are all doing here right now and why... My best guess is it is a hobby some people enjoy, and spiritually-related things are one of the easiest most broad ideas to pick up to bring you into a community of other like-minded want-to-know-something-they-can't kind of people.
We've chatted and you said you're not one to be confused by what you need to do. Maybe that's why it's hard for you to understand why some people need to believe in mystical things. Life is very complicated. We make choices, often ones we regret, and then are lambasted by guilt and confusion and uncertainty as to how to rectify things. Mystical things provide some comfort. For example, belief in things like karma make a person feel as if all their good-intentioned actions will be worth more than a brief satisfaction, that all their hard work will be of some long-term benefit. I wish I could truly believe that. It would be great to think that if I pick up a piece of litter off the street, remember to cross at the walklight or put away my neighbor's garbage cans, that if I do those things and no one knows I did them, that they still matter. On a larger scale, if I sit in the lobby waiting for my friend in surgery to make sure she's okay - and it has no affect on her, she doesn't even know I'm there - and I'm there for hours, exhausted, sick with worry, and then I go home - I wish I could believe that all those hours of worry amounted to something more than me alone in a hospital waiting room. I wish I could be assured that someone up there, something, cared and was smiling down on me and when I died it would all come back as well wishes. Let me clarify a little, though - I don't know that "I" wish those things, I think maybe I did once and some people in general do. It's comforting to feel our efforts matter. But the reality is that they do matter, just perhaps not in a fireworks and explosions sort of way. If I pick up a piece of litter, the earth is cleaner. Cross at the walklight, well, who knows, not sure if that will ever matter. Put away my neighbor's garbage cans, the tired neighbor after a long day of work has a brief smile because he can go inside and put his feet up without worrying about chasing down the garbage cans that have blown down the street. And if I stay by my friend, who is sick and drugged up and completely unaware I'm there, the satisfaction comes from knowing that my love for her was greater than my love for my own physical comforts. Sometimes it's hard to accept that our actions are small and miniscule and won't matter in a hundred years. That perhaps is part of the appeal of mysticism - the belief that we can have a long-term impact on the world. Perhaps it's even arrogance in a way, I'm not sure. I could go on about all the other types of comfort mysticism can bring, but I don't want to write War and Peace on this thread.
2) Why do we think we're somehow special?
I think humans are innately selfish and arrogant. It takes a great deal of effort to grow past that. Think about an infant: all that matters to it are its own needs and desires. With time, we grow and learn to think about the world around us and believe that we are not all that matters. (Well, hopefully we do.) So why do we think we're special? Because it's nice to think that, it makes us feel good, and we like to believe we're great. Not true, sans doute, but that takes us back to the whole self-delusion topic.
3) Why not just accept that life is an unsolvable mystery and move on? Ever stare at those clouds rolling by without trying to explain them? Or that sunset?
Who says that there are people who don't do that? And yet who is to say that questioning and wondering and striving to learn are bad? Curiosity has gotten us a long ways in the world. If no one wondered "what if" then we would still be living in caves and eating berries. I love to look at the sunset and just immerse myself in it...on the beach, a cold wind and the sound of seagulls and the waves crashing and a sunset that is gold and red and violet...not trying to capture it, or think about it, but just allow myself to feel at one with the world and life and know that things will continue long past me. Maybe that's my own personal mysticism? I don't know. But there are other things that I wonder about, that I strive to learn and understand. How does the human mind work? Why does a child with unlimited potential end up killing his fellow students and living in misery? Why do people hurt? Is hurting bad? Can I make a difference in someone's life? Does any of this matter? I can't answer a lot of those questions, and I doubt I ever will. But what is wrong with wondering? You wonder why people believe in mysticism...you are asking questions, wondering too. Perhaps that is our nature, to question. And yes, it is beautiful to be able to let go of that sometimes and experience life with all your senses. But for whatever reason, for evolutionary reasons perhaps, I wonder if I can understand the world around me. And the truth, for me, is that sometimes that wondering leads to insights that enrich my world and make my life more beautiful and fulfilling.
I know I'm going in circles here, and I apologize if what I've said is confusing. I'm only 26 and haven't figured out a heck of a lot. Truth be told, I don't expect to. But if wondering brings me closer to the people I love and to understanding myself, then it is worthwhile for me. I will not settle for just a dish of food in front of me and warm clothes. I need more. I do not need blind faith, but I need to fill the desires for love and comfort and intellectual satisfaction that burn inside of me. If I cannot fill these, at least I need to strive towards that fulfillment - and the striving is a wonderful, exciting journey.
frenchbabyface: You made great points on the problems of mainstream religion (or really, any organized religion/cult) - about how it skews people from 'unconditional love' (not senseless / mindless love), how the followers are being victimized by the religious leaders, and how it causes nothing good (on the whole). Also you touched on the why - with those four points. You spoke about it in a different way than I've thought about these things before...but I'd like to further some things a bit, sort of like a question / something to consider...towards the questions I asked.
Now if these people are in an organization that causes trouble, they have reasons (reasons like what you said). But in my mind, these points tend to make me think that whole problem here rests on selfishness. These people (especially the leaders) don't want a world where all can exist as equals - such as Marx's humanist conception of communism - true communism. I think this is the same reason true communism under human rule (who says we can't make an unbiased artificial intelligence to oversee people? lol) is impossible - corruption. This a big allegation to make against such a great number of people however, so I will go into detail.
- There culture (most often Dad and mom beliefs)
- There specific need (not really love - see how they can go crazy about how they love in JWLand for instance just because their belief even with their own kids) ... and truly they wouldn't if only they could be objective on the matter ... (very important here)
- The need to feel special on a higher level
- and well life is so short
1. When we grow up, Mommy & Daddy [hopefully] have little to no say in how we think or choose to run our lives. However, some people value their families greatly, and wouldn't want to push themselves away from them by leaving the religion they were brought in. This extends further than family - a religion opens up a community for you, one that is often kept seperate from the public. To break free of a religion on grounds of 'what you see is right' may pale in comparison to staying in the religion to continue socializing and enjoying time with your friends there. It's hard to leave religion or change your views even if only because you can lose/distance friends/family.
2. Lack of objectivity - or worse yet, willful ignorance, gullibility or plain old stupidity - holds some to a faith that has given them all the answers they seek. To leave would mean to be cast adrift in a world of unanswered questions and unknowns - this is stress some people can't or don't want to handle. Tied to point #4, this is too needless a concern for them to ever leave. It is easier and much more comfortable to stay put than to think radically different, especially if the one's customs please them greatly. It's a bother, or stressful, to leave a way of life behind to start a new one that operates radically different.
3. It's true...many people want to feel important, special...I won't go so far as to say all, but I don't know. There could be a great many reasons for this, and whether they are different for everyone or fall under some unified lumped set of categories for all of humanity is uncertain. Those who don't necessarily have an easy break for feeling this way already in life (or desire it to the maximum potential) are told they are in league with the Divine (depending on the faith...but something more or less equivalent to this). It is another way of being told 'you are the best'. There may be restrictions or rules that they will have to follow to maintain this status as one of the faith, but generally that is part of religion's control. You follow the rules to stay in the group and feel special. People are so arrogant and self-righteous, while similtaneously being fools, that they will adhere to a system of rules that brings them no 'real' value (an emotional need - whatever value you place on this - I am going to be starting another thread that relates to this somewhat later) and may in fact detract from their enjoyment of life.
4. Life is short - that is to say, life is finite. People know that they are not going to be around forever. Aging is only a reminder of this, though earlier for some than others. Life is too short to be flopping around between ideas instead of gaining esteem in one organization. Life is too short to 'waste' it helping others instead of just feeling good in whatever way possible. After all, concerning our survival, we pride ourselves and our kindred first and foremost - why not extend this to all parts of life? You can even offset this by dropping a few coins in a donation box for some vague charity that will help some starving children in some faraway land you'll never have to lay eyes on. Almost no human being spends the majority of its time giving what it has away to others, spending its time to make others' lives better. Such a task, is, for one, difficult to discern, and furthermore it is harder to even know how much impact it will have. But is that because one person can barely make a scratch in the problem, or is it because there are too many unwilling to do the right thing? People are scared and/or so self-absorbed to bother with working to make things equal and good for everyone (especially the ones with more than others).
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = CORRUPTION. "I come first, you come second" is the reason that I think true communism (or at least a truly united community) will never happen. It is not that I have no hope for it, I just see the likelihood is that this preference of people to themselves will simply not change (only because it never has before), nor do I see any alternative for changing everyone's mind. Things like religion will most likely always exist as testaments to the problem with most of humanity. But realizing this, would a person who would prefer the world to be a truly good place commit to such a thing? IMO, no, I don't think so. I don't see anything wrong with having spiritual views in this sense (asides from them being unnecessary - ...except for emotional value...see next thread), however they should come from within rather than the teachings of others - that is to say, others who want to control your life and take your money (your livelihood).
Rune ... Oh man ... what can I say ? You put it clear (I mean it is what I think) I'm just waiting for your new thread also !!!
But I don't want to agree with the fact that things can't change ... I HAVE A DREAM ... (lol) ... ok ok ok ... will come back to explain why as a hint : we are able today to communicate worldwide / to talk true also towards forums
That's when Energy (the one we knows how it works) POSITIVITY (not the mystic one) might help for good ... now (cause it is the first time in our history) that at least we can communicate worldwide and get some points out of biased feelings and positions ... WE DO EVOLUATE (we just never tried to evoluate on this) ...
Ok ... Sorry, Rune but I'm very tired today to go further on this tonight (I more feel to read that writting) ... but maybe people understand what I've said and feel the same and can go further on it right now in there own ways and with their own examples and possible solutions ... I'll come back tomorrow to go further on what I think about it in hoping that maybe, you or anybody else will have said it all ...
Read you soon !
kitties_and_horses_oh_my!: Naw, I only said I wasn't expecting any kind of response that would satisfy me (that is, where I would go: "hmm ok that sounds right, thanks I'm done"). Excellent point using karma as an example...I hadn't quite thought of it that way! As I mentioned, all of those mystical ideas on "things coming back to you" do in a sense relate to common sense, but just as you mentioned, perhaps not in a way we would expect or a way that would cause a surprisingly significant impact. Your answer to #2 was completely new to me, though I had considered infancy in a few ways, never as simple as that before.
Perhaps then our selfishness roots from survival instincts that are a part of us. You definitely don't want to find a way to make humans not have survival instincts - an altruistic race would doubtless be problematic (however maybe not as problematic as the way humanity sounds.) Though I guess I'm getting off on a wild idea here, since as you can probably guess this would require modifying the human genome to engineer everyone to be a certain way other than how they are now. Yikes. Like that will ever happen...
I never meant to imply there aren't already a lot of people who do that. I'm just speaking on the ranks of those caught up in mysticism (though I suppose primarily the mainstream ones and the cults with memberships). I see a distinction between feeling in love with a moment and thinking mystical about it though. Though perhaps as this conversation is turning - the mystical directly relates to the emotional. In which sense: 'Mysticizing' (look look I made up a word) the moment may merely be a way to emphasize how truly special it is to you. Since this is a personally generated thing rather than one fed to you by money-grubbing freedom-stealing creeps, I don't see any reason to consider it foolish...but that will come in the next thread.
As for those questions you mentioned to show you can't help but wonder at life - that's true, but making educated guesses can't hurt. I agree...striving for more is what keeps some of us going.
To step back for a minute to the other bold text here about survival instincts making us selfish, this is one of the few guesses I have about why we are selfish and why we cannot just all 'change'. For some it may be next to impossible just because of the experiences of their life and the chemical configuration of their brain. If this is not a totalitarian change, what do we do with the people who wouldn't participate in our (well, me, frenchbabyface & maybe Marx's) utopian society? Imprison them, evict them from their homes to live in some isolated place, or kill them? Naturally if one's concern is that of fairness for all, there are only two ways of looking at it: The 'greater' good (or evil), or the view of neutrality.
The 'greater' good (or evil) idea would consist of doing one of those three awful things to any who did not wish to participate in the utopia. The 'greater' good would be that everyone willing to participate (hopefully the majority but...who knows) would get to exist in a world where no one is on top, where all are equal. No one with more than you to snub you and make you feel bad, no one under you to curse you for being so filthy rich. This is not a good example of the benefit (or even the point) of utopia, but you get what I mean. But the utopia can't work without everyone participating willfully. Democracy then becomes absurd - but as I see it there shouldn't even be a human head of state. People then are not really free except to leave society and be outcast to the fate society decrees for them. This can be considered unjust. The greater 'good' is served however - those who want to live in a world free of many of today's problems get it. Those who don't well...this is where the greater 'evil' part comes in to play.
The idea of neutrality would mean that since you rob people of their freedom, it is wrong to even attempt such a change. No good or evil should be served - let people to their own devices. In a sense this is no better or worse than being forced to live in a utopia - when you live in a 'free' society you are still restricted by laws and your situation - finances, family, geographical area, etc. You will not be equal to everyone else, at least not in your quality of life - and probably not in your enjoyment of life. It's up to you to adapt or to aspire for more through the routines necessary. But many of certain dominations may find it nigh-impossible to ever reach that level where the quality of their life improves.
To put it bluntly, everyone would have to willingly adopt frenchbabyface's optimism and energy for this utopian future to even be possible. But if not everyone will stop being selfish - not everyone will look for a common good - then this is likely to be impossible. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I see the world staying the same as it always has been - the strong rule, the weak suffer. Class and denominational 'warfare' (both literally and metaphorically) will persist. My hope is not extinguished however. Here's what it would take:
- inhumanly servient soldiers using non-lethal debilitating force; this would require robots or genetically modified beings to enact
- a leader or central mind free of corruption - since a human cannot be trusted for this (and humans die), the natural choice is a leader crafted in a shell of metal and electronics that only fulfills its programming, wanting nothing more because it was built only to do a certain thing.
- someone with enough power, money and conviction in this system to actually attempt something like this
- the victory of these soldiers over the governments of the world
- possibly, the brainwashing of people who persistently resist (or form resistance cells with the misguided belief the old system was better)
Uhm, naturally, this seems a touch too sci-fi to even consider a possibility right now. To change a world, you need otherworldly ideas. (The preceding statement is not meant to be taken out of context to infer that religion is a good idea.) Unfortunately believing in something like this happening is no less misguided than a Witness waiting for Armageddon so the bad old world will go away.
We must adapt to our environment...
