Introspection
JoinedPosts by Introspection
-
50
Is Satan the good guy?
by blackout inif i were to believe in the bible (which i am starting to totally disbelieve), i like the idea that satan was actually on mans side, and when you look at what he told eve he was actually telling the truth, it was god who lied.
this used to cross my mind as a witness but i would very swiftly dismiss it as demons affecting my thinking.
didn't he say we could rule ourselves if given a fair chance?
-
-
-
31
Is Relgious belief a trick of the mind?
by sleepy in.
what is it about our brians that drives people to religious beliefs that are so obviously nopt founded in fact or reason?is it an inherant founction of our tiny brians or is it in fact our brians going wrong in trying to make sense of the world?
maybe its the psychological equivelent of an optical illution were your brain in trying to make sense of what it sees constructs an impossible reality .like say when you draw a "3-d" box on a flat piece of paper and the brain tries to work out which face is on the front , but it can't, as none is, but the brain will put one in front whatever.maybe religion is what the brain makes to explain the world and uses it so the weiredness of reality makes more sense.
-
-
Introspection
Siegswife, I thought that we were kind of on the same page, and your last reply confirmed that.
Whether your ideas of anything is 'right or wrong' is not the issue, it's just that those are just ideas, what they point to is the real thing, the ideas themselves are not. (which would include beliefs) What I was proposing is simply an experiment - it's not like people can just throw away a thought and never have it come up again anyways. To put it in other words, reality is not our ideas about it, whether we use the word God or whatever other word. I'm not even saying to make a judgement about the ideas like are they right or wrong, but rather see the irrelevance of it. After all, if you're talking about something along the lines of ultimate reality, how can that change by just a change in your own thinking? You changing your own thinking is just and only that, it does not change the fundamental reality of the universe.
If this recognition of being is what we're after, then anything else is only so much riffraff, including any and all concepts you have about it. This is what I'm trying to put across here, it's like the difference between a picture of a nice dish and actually eating it. If our ideas can lead to the insane behavior of looking at pictures of food when we're hungry, then wouldn't you say it may be that we should consider putting them on hold so we can take in some of the real thing?
-
31
Is Relgious belief a trick of the mind?
by sleepy in.
what is it about our brians that drives people to religious beliefs that are so obviously nopt founded in fact or reason?is it an inherant founction of our tiny brians or is it in fact our brians going wrong in trying to make sense of the world?
maybe its the psychological equivelent of an optical illution were your brain in trying to make sense of what it sees constructs an impossible reality .like say when you draw a "3-d" box on a flat piece of paper and the brain tries to work out which face is on the front , but it can't, as none is, but the brain will put one in front whatever.maybe religion is what the brain makes to explain the world and uses it so the weiredness of reality makes more sense.
-
-
Introspection
So what makes/made people decide to believe in and give authenticity to the concept of superior authorities even when it can detrimentally affect their basic insticts to have enough food and other neccessities for their families? Even when it takes away from their own autonomy?
Sorry about this, I had addressed this in my original post but there was an error, and I had decided to shorten the response and left this out. Basically, the issue is one of identification with mind. It's clear when your basic material needs aren't being met, but we know people who hold to certain beliefs strongly will ignore common sense. The body is telling you that it's hungry, but the person is ignoring the body in favor of a thought - say when someone goes on an unbalanced diet.
Consider this for a moment: Authority only has meaning if you view things as separate - you have the one in authority, and the one that submits to authority - it's a hierarchical relationship. The fact is, though, that even among things in an apparent relationship of subject and authority such as the body and the mind, people in a government or whatever, there's influence from both directions.
If you can't see things that way and must view things in terms of authority, then why don't you follow that instinct? My last reply was mainly in response to the way you stated your conclusion where you said "religious belief." Of course, if you're looking for an answer of ultimate authority, it won't be found in the mind. It's interesting how you referred to the parent/child relationship, can you see how one thought is necessarily dependent upon others? It's relative. You can collect a bunch of information to support this belief and that, but you won't know, you're just trying to reinforce a belief - one way or the other. If you (or anyone) want to know the truth, they have to let go of their preconceived notions, including the idea of authority and even God. If you're willing to do this you may notice the psychological mind feeling uneasy, but at that point the only thing you can see is the truth that isn't influenced by your beliefs. After all, if God is more than just a concept for you, you have nothing to lose but an idea.
-
172
Evolution or Creation??
by dottie inwell i know i may be opening a can of worms here.... but after what we were taught in the wts about creation...and now that you may know more about evolution... which do you think you'd choose to believe more??.
myself...i am leaning towards evolution...but then i read things that make me think otherwise.
so i do find it confusing sometimes .
-
-
Introspection
which do you think you'd choose to believe more??
I choose not to believe. I can acknowledge that given a certain set of data, it can point to certain ideas, but there is no need to jump to any conclusions. For most people creation also implies a personal God in the likeness of man, certain ideas about time etc. which of course makes certain assumptions. There is the alternative of an open ended question like "how did it all get here?" I think this would work better if we really want to examine the issue, 'this vs. that' will have people taking sides right from the beginning.
-
31
Is Relgious belief a trick of the mind?
by sleepy in.
what is it about our brians that drives people to religious beliefs that are so obviously nopt founded in fact or reason?is it an inherant founction of our tiny brians or is it in fact our brians going wrong in trying to make sense of the world?
maybe its the psychological equivelent of an optical illution were your brain in trying to make sense of what it sees constructs an impossible reality .like say when you draw a "3-d" box on a flat piece of paper and the brain tries to work out which face is on the front , but it can't, as none is, but the brain will put one in front whatever.maybe religion is what the brain makes to explain the world and uses it so the weiredness of reality makes more sense.
-
-
Introspection
Good point Siegs. I think maybe we might distinguish between authenticity and authority, though. Someone will submit to a perceived external authority basically out of a belief, but I think there is a natural instinct of sorts that prompts us to act in a genuine and authentic way. It seems to me that more often than not, following authority out of a belief is actually a resistance against your own nature, you sacrifice your authenticity in a way. It doesn't necessarily have to involve resistance though, but if someone is completely identified with their mind then this can happen easily. The thing is, there are a things like breathing, thirst and hunger that are more essential to life which does not operate from beliefs, from the psychological mind. We all submit to these authorities on a regular basis, but it's certainly not out of what one would call belief.
-
50
Is Satan the good guy?
by blackout inif i were to believe in the bible (which i am starting to totally disbelieve), i like the idea that satan was actually on mans side, and when you look at what he told eve he was actually telling the truth, it was god who lied.
this used to cross my mind as a witness but i would very swiftly dismiss it as demons affecting my thinking.
didn't he say we could rule ourselves if given a fair chance?
-
-
Introspection
Oh come on guys, why even entertain that way of thinking? It doesn't have to be a matter of believing or not, you know. Given what we know about psychology, isn't it pretty clear that to view these things in a way with personal characters is simply a matter of projection?
-
31
Is Relgious belief a trick of the mind?
by sleepy in.
what is it about our brians that drives people to religious beliefs that are so obviously nopt founded in fact or reason?is it an inherant founction of our tiny brians or is it in fact our brians going wrong in trying to make sense of the world?
maybe its the psychological equivelent of an optical illution were your brain in trying to make sense of what it sees constructs an impossible reality .like say when you draw a "3-d" box on a flat piece of paper and the brain tries to work out which face is on the front , but it can't, as none is, but the brain will put one in front whatever.maybe religion is what the brain makes to explain the world and uses it so the weiredness of reality makes more sense.
-
-
Introspection
Hi Gita,
In any case, my original point was if people who regularly and formally meditate cannot just sit, then what does that say about the power of their practice?
That they are using a formal practise because typically the body and the mind are both restless. We are not typically born yogis. Getting into the whole "realization of the self" thing aint as simple as sitting around. Well maybe for one out of a million, but putting that sort of onus on someone interested in really learning about themselves is going to do nothing but leave them frustrated and perhaps a bit crestfallen. That is why methods exist.
Ok, there is one point which would help clarify this, which is that one may have moments of realization and not fully embody or have that realization actualized 24/7. But again, I never said it's as simple as sitting around in the typical sense, and there can only be frustration if a person has judgements, and that happens just as much with spiritual people who meditate as with anything else.
I'm not saying to give up methods altogether, but just to understand what it is. The mistake is to believe in a method in thinking that it will get you somewhere by way of doing a kind of works. One monk, I believe this was a Lama in the Tibetan tradition, said "Enlightenment is an accident, meditation makes you accident prone." I say if you want to stick to a method, great - go right ahead and practice away. But if you don't know what it's about and are just going at it blindly because you heard good things about it, then you really don't know what you're doing do you? That's just common sense, but too many people approach meditation with this mindset, which is simply the religious mindset. The question is not what it's about, it's whether you understand what it's about in practice, because a conceptual understanding doesn't always translate over.
I might add, too, that ultimately it's pretty worthless if you are only able to be peaceful and still when being physically static. Even inanimate objects can be at peace by not doing anything, I should think an enlightened person would be able to act in peace beyond just sitting and walking. Once again, this was my point - it's not about sitting outside of formal meditation, it's about 'being mindful' in everything you do, I just mentioned non-formal sitting because that's the closest thing in form, yet we see there's a significant difference in how it's approached. 'Spiritual people' tend to talk about experiencing and feeling a certain way, but the distinction of spiritual experiences, activity and ideas against other non-spiritual ones just goes to show how polarized their thinking is. This is just spiritual ego. A person's own tradition and spiritual practice is probably the biggest and yet most obvious illusion.
-
27
This vs That
by animal inwow.. a serious post from animal... who woulda thought..... anyhow, we discussed something last weekend that needs more discussion.
it involves people born into the jw cult versus those that made an adult decision to join it.. my thoughts were:.
anyone not born into the cult have no idea of the mental anguish involved in being brainwashed, from birth, with all the cultisms.
-
-
Introspection
A couple of things come to mind for me. The first is that the thought that other people can't understand you (regardless of the issue) exists in your own mind, doesn't it? Whatever understanding they actually have exists in theirs, and unless we're psychic or something then it just follows that we don't know exactly what that is. As for what it is like, the depth of the emotional experience and such, I won't ever say that I fully understand what someone else has gone through, I just don't know. But there is a difference between seeking to understand and seeking to be understood, even if my understanding is limited in some way I would be interested to have a better understanding. If someone is willing to talk to me about it, I can only assume they atleast don't believe that it is impossible for me to gain a better understanding.
This gets into my second thought, which is that I'm more interested in possibly helping you to get past it than to understand the problems which you may have. Of course having insight into the situation always helps and to that end I would be interested in having a better understanding, but the point is it's possible to help even if you haven't been in that same situation. A lot of us here consider psychotherapy helpful, of course we think it's more helpful with one that's been a witness, and I guess for some even more so if the therapist was raised as a JW. Now suppose you know a therapist who was raised a witness, but someone who's still dealing with those issues himself - he's still suffering from it as much as you are. Compare this with someone who was a witness but not raised as one, but they have moved on and have a happy life - which would you choose? I mean, if the first witness flat out tells you that "I haven't got this thing figured out" - whereas the other one finds evidence that he can help you and is living a free life, why would you go to the first? Now obviously I'm not saying people who are raised as witnesses can't get past certain things - I know of a therapist who was raised as a JW actually - but the point is there is a difference between being with someone who understands, and being with someone who can help. The two are not mutually exclusive of course, but the question is: Which are you more interested in?
By the way, if you've decided you've gotten as far as you can with this and so you're not interested in help, I say okay. I don't say this to be some kind of exJW saint or something, that's why I said 'possibly help.' But besides that, we all just make up our own minds about stuff. You can tell me "Intro, I think you're full of shit" and I couldn't get too worked up about it, because even if I do try to explain myself ultimately it's just what you think, it just so happens it's a negative thought about me. All we can do is throw the ideas out there, everyone else will think whatever they think about it.
-
27
This vs That
by animal inwow.. a serious post from animal... who woulda thought..... anyhow, we discussed something last weekend that needs more discussion.
it involves people born into the jw cult versus those that made an adult decision to join it.. my thoughts were:.
anyone not born into the cult have no idea of the mental anguish involved in being brainwashed, from birth, with all the cultisms.
-
-
Introspection
Good observations. I would say, though, that all we ever have are ideas of what someone else has gone through in their life, even for those who were raised in the religion each experience is different from another individuals, it's all a matter of degree.
This has been discussed before, but I think maybe I can sum it up this way: I don't have to fully understand your experience to consider you a friend, can you say the same? If we can get past this, what need is there for defense? (provided we don't throw out judgements and stuff like that)
-
31
Is Relgious belief a trick of the mind?
by sleepy in.
what is it about our brians that drives people to religious beliefs that are so obviously nopt founded in fact or reason?is it an inherant founction of our tiny brians or is it in fact our brians going wrong in trying to make sense of the world?
maybe its the psychological equivelent of an optical illution were your brain in trying to make sense of what it sees constructs an impossible reality .like say when you draw a "3-d" box on a flat piece of paper and the brain tries to work out which face is on the front , but it can't, as none is, but the brain will put one in front whatever.maybe religion is what the brain makes to explain the world and uses it so the weiredness of reality makes more sense.
-
-
Introspection
I'm aware that there are different approaches and techniques, but I was speaking in context of realizing one's true nature, which is what all this is for, isn't it?
If your intent is to manage your mind in order to attain what you consider a better, more peaceful life for yourself, I agree you would probably benefit from methods by which you can manipulate your mind state.
In any case, my original point was if people who regularly and formally meditate cannot just sit, then what does that say about the power of their practice? If you believe just sitting is spiritually inferior compared to formal meditation, it kind of calls into question why one can't do it when they've been doing the more advanced "real thing" doesn't it?
So is 'mindfulness' a function of one's mind then? Doesn't that imply that any understanding of the drop and the ocean is simply a thought pattern in someone's head? I've done walking meditation, but what people seem to miss in this is that being aware doesn't necessitate control, (even in trying to be "more aware", as if you can somehow pull another bushel of awareness from thin air) yet people walk very carefully and try to sit very still. Obviously this is helpful in a practical sense, but awareness is awareness, control is control. It's just empty. Someone may be able to enter subtle states of consciousness but not be free from it, that's just more tricks of the mind. While the mind does naturally settle if the body is still, you're only at peace when mind chatter does not bother you, not when you have to get rid of it. After all, you don't have to believe any of it.