Good Vs. Evil

[tangsky420]

latley in my life i have been debating in my life what is really good to me and what is really evil to me. I am not a religous person but i have tried to practice the christain faith. During this time it dawned on me that i had to belive in this supiriour being, where on some of it i trully thought that im my heart felt right yet in the bible it say excepet Jessus Christ as your lord in savor into your hearts and youll live in his kingdom in the after life. But if you dont belive and except him into your heart you will basically go to hell.

for instance hypathetically there is identical person to Mother Tereasa does everything she can to better the human race and herself but she does not belive in God. But there is a man who robs a store and gets away with it he repents acording to the christian faith the man would go to heaven and the girl goes to hell

personally if i were to look at that i would say that the girl goes to heaven and boy should go to hell
so i think good is honestly if you trully think in your hear that it feels right to do something or say that it is trully good
and viceversa for evil

i am very new to this subject and if it is going now where whatever or if you have answers or replies i would love to debate them

[Nick_A]

Hello tangsky

for instance hypathetically there is identical person to Mother Tereasa does everything she can to better the human race and herself but she does not belive in God. But there is a man who robs a store and gets away with it he repents acording to the christian faith the man would go to heaven and the girl goes to hell

Why debate such a question? It is hard enough to understand it enough to discuss it much less get the egos involved in debate.

The truth of it just seems so unfair. It appears so because we believe we have consciousness and choice of a quality that could really sin. We may break morals and laws and call it sin but as unflattering as it sounds we are incapable of sin until we've experienced the higher in ourselves and strive towards it.

I remember reading something to the effect that "man does not do anything for the sake of evil but only for good as he understands it". This raised all the appropriate growls in me and it took quite a while for me to come to the realization that without objective choice, it must be so.

Hell as you've described it is similar to the Buddhist's samsara where the human energies remain in a degraded state. However, a person who has awakened say as Paul did, has the capacity for real sin. His inner worth invites an equal force of opposition and he is open to an inner contamination we are incapable of. That would lead to hell, or being captive by negative emotion yet seeing the emptiness of it.

The good person like you've described gradually grows inwardly in the course of the tradition or in the greater "body" itself. What words are used doesn't mean anything. They don't have prayer boxes on above levels where certain angels have to sort out which ones go to who.

However, it is possible for a person who has been a real SOB by cultural standards and awakens to realize it and to consciously experience himself. This is worth saving and something can be built upon it. Hence, he is considered "saved".

I know how unfair this appears since we value our interactions during our earthly life so highly. It never dawns on us that somehow we could awaken to reality and our possibilities could be different.

It seems wrong to put our conceptions of good and evil into such a perspective. It puts us on the same level as life in the jungle for example where neither the deer or the lion is considered good nor bad but just part of a process. But it is what it is.

It raises the question if there is an OBJECTIVE morality we are unaware of that exists which is not at all the same as the relative SUBJECTIVE morality we all are aware of?

[jesupocaplypse]

what's hell? where is it? and why would you go there for being?

heaven and hell are states of mind.


good and evil, are just words, used to describe something in relation to the way it affects you.

Is the sun good or evil? it creates life and light, but it burns and kills too.

[Nick_A]

JP

what's hell? where is it? and why would you go there for being?

heaven and hell are states of mind.

As we live in a dream, hell is very tempting. It allows us to justify our feelings of self importance.

Matthew 4

8Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9"All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me."

You don't find this tempting? Imagine if you had the quality of being that could allow you to "do". You could have all the money, prestige, beautiful women etc. you wanted.

The trouble is that hell is not a state of mind but a state of being. Human being is very pure. It is possible through imagination to have man made emotions attach themselves to it. This is hard to do and requires a lot of egotistic effort so it rarely happens but it can be done. The result is that after the physicial death, there is no longer imagination but the pure human essence, or our evolutionary part has this man made psychic cancer of negative emotion attached to it. Without the glory of imagination it is experienced for what it is, a limiting attachment of emotional fires that denies this human essence its natural direction towards love.

good and evil, are just words, used to describe something in relation to the way it affects you.

Is the sun good or evil? it creates life and light, but it burns and kills too.

That is how WE interpret good and evil but does it have an objective meaning as well?

Genesis 1
3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.

What is so "good" about this light especially when there are no suns to produce it? It is objective good.

[jesupocaplypse]

Are you sure that's not just a metaphor for the creation of the Stars?

Quoting the bible really doesn't strengthen, or prove a thing to me. It's an ancient thing, written by primitive screwheads, who barely understood how fire worked, let alone the formation and workings of the universe. I take the bible, with a grain of salt. It is no more important than any other book written by any other human. The Lord of the Rings, or Dune, is a far better book to look to for guidance.. screw WWJD...
... What Would Aragorn Do? What Would Paul Atreides Do?

Yet, the points you make, aside from the quotes, are valid, and I certainly under stand what your saying. I even agree for the most part, though of course, it's entirely speculation. (or have you died and can remember it, that you actually know?) but that's sort of the the whole point to this forum is it not?

states of mind, states of being. yes.

Objective good or bad? I don't think so. Not even in the slightest. What does the sun think about good or bad? Do the cosmos have a notion of good or bad?

Objective good/evil, is an oxymoron . Everything in existance, from an Objective point of view, devoid of judgements, or opinions.... Is simply Existance.

Is Existance... Good or Bad? Objectively speaking..... Neither. Both. Existance is Existance. plain pure and simple.

Good can't exist without bad. And vice verse. So 'Bad' cannot be bad, because without it, we wouldn't have Good. and 'Good' can't really be so good, because with it, we also have Bad.

:uninvolved:

I personally believe we created ourselves, that we can experience ourselves/everything Subjectively. Throughout the universe, every possibility, exists somewhere.

We are here to experience Existance, every aspect of existance. So nothing we do can be bad, nor good, except as we view it while it's happening. Simply an aspect of existance. A fragment of the whole. We are all part of the same compost heap. Nightmares make the sweet dreams sweeter. Sweet dreams make the nightmares scarier. I love them both. I love it all. I love the serial killers, as much as I love the Saints. I call neither good, and neither bad. They are what they are.

and on and on and on

:tao:

[Nick_A]

JP

It's an ancient thing, written by primitive screwheads, who barely understood how fire worked, let alone the formation and workings of the universe.

Some of those screwheads at least understood why the earth was considered flat. Have you figured that out? Most modern people haven't as of yet.

Do the cosmos have a notion of good or bad?

Yes, of course.

Is Existance... Good or Bad? Objectively speaking..... Neither. Both. Existance is Existance. plain pure and simple.

That's like saying a woman is a woman. It may be a bit more than that. And if you think understanding a woman can be difficult , just start trying to understand existence. Lots of Merlot to be consumed during these efforts.

We are here to experience Existance, every aspect of existance. So nothing we do can be bad, nor good, except as we view it while it's happening..

It may be a "good" thing to learn how to get out of your own way so that such a thing may be possible..

One thing we do agree upon is that it does go on and on and on. :)

[jesupocaplypse]

Some of those screwheads at least understood why the earth was considered flat. Have you figured that out? Most modern people haven't as of yet.

I've only seen pictures to prove otherwise. Maybe it's all a hoax, and the World IS flat, :D

Perspective. But then, how do you know what most modern people know?


Do the cosmos have a notion of good or bad?

Yes, of course. You seem quite sure of yourself. How can you possibly know that? The quality of these words are wearing thin... :rolleyes:
Assumptions...


A woman is a woman. No other "words" are necessary, only experience. I do Not think they are difficult to understand in the least bit. Quite the opposite. They're easier to understand than is commonly reputed. (but maybe i'm just gifted that way) "Start" trying to understand existance? I started when i was born. Maybe even sooner. it's not something that needs to be 'understood'. Only experienced.


Are you saying I am in my way? In my way of what? Or In my own way? I think, I am ON my Way.

:lol:

[jesupocaplypse]

The word "Understand" is a funny one. How did it originate? Under - Stand ...the word's formation, has nothing to do with it's meaning as I "understand" it.... <_<

under stand? stand under? like to Stand Behind something? as in to support it? My Behindstanding of this concept is dissipating...

Can you Overstand an idea? Undersit? Oversit? Abovestand? Abovelay? :wacko:

Oh words, forever will you be a source of silly amusement to me :lol:

I abovelay everything your saying. :D


(those who watch star trek: TNG, try to pronouce "abovelay", in a Captain Picard like accent, as if he were saying "Beverly" (Bev-Ahr-leh) ) :lol: maybe only i find that funny....

[Nick_A]

JP

Yes, of course. You seem quite sure of yourself. How can you possibly know that? The quality of these words are wearing thin...
Assumptions...

Well you seemed sure that those in the past were just idiotic screwheads so I had to give some sort of equally sarcastic response to retain the mood. But what I said is essentially true in that I've read that this idea of flat earth was completely misunderstood.

I was also quite serious about a cosmos but just said in the spirit of your previous post. If the universe is alive in such ways as you've spoken of "mind", it stands to reason that if it is divided into levels or cosmoses, they should be equally alive but with a different degree of wholeness reflecting different degrees of consciousness.

A woman is a woman. No other "words" are necessary, only experience. I do Not think they are difficult to understand in the least bit.
Being set up for the kill eh! :) The fact that men came to the reluctant conclusion that women have the perogative to change their mind came from years of experience and knowledge of the futility of trying to figure it all out. :) Just kidding. Of course all women are different and unique in their own way as are men.

Are you saying I am in my way? In my way of what? Or In my own way? I think, I am ON my Way.

In your way of discovering the Way. The fact that you think you are on your way shows how much you are in your way. Going in circles or cycles may appear as though one is making progress on your way but you end up back at square one after all is said and done..

The word "Understand" is a funny one. How did it originate? Under - Stand ...the word's formation, has nothing to do with it's meaning as I "understand" it....

When you understand something you become one with it in a way. This is what it means to stand under. You connect with it. I've read it related to what is going on when the cow is standing under the Bull. There is a certain linking going on where they become "one" so to speak. It is the same thing when we reach undersanding with higher perspective. We stand under it so to speak and become in a sense "one" with it as does the cow with the bull

[jesupocaplypse]

woah man.... you just convinced me to go out of my way to never understand a thing ever again...

.... :D


I never said Idiotic screw heads. I said primitive. I chose that word for a reason. I s'pose i spoke in a way, that I and those around me, are used to and take for granted.... I refer to most beings other than me and mine, as screwheads.. The whole damn world is Filled with screwheads, always has been , always will be ... from this pov. :P

I'm sure that those in the future are going to be just as idiotic of screwheads, as those that exist now, and those that existed then. But instead of primitive, or modern screwheads.... they'll be future screwheads..... screwheads nonetheless.

Ah, I really have had nothing substantial that i disagreed with from your responses, and in fact am quite thankful of them. Perhaps i wasn;t expressive of it enough. I was just picking at frayed loose ends so to speak. I know I'm not innocent of it in any form either,, but let's both try to avoid presumptions declared as absolutes in regards to concepts we can only imagine / speculate shall we? The cosmos is something that is Meant to be a mystery in this life, and thus, I make no effort to try and assign a comparison to it with my own life . It's big and complex, uh huh. it's beautiful... yup, these i can see. But what i cannot , i care not. I 'personify' just about everything, it's a habit of my writing style.... so while I may refer to the sun and moon as a Her and a Him, or what have you,.... I'm not implying anything. Mind is something.... better left empty, that it may be filled. All existance can be seen in levels... it's a scientific fact that everything has it's own frequency. Solid rock, to sound, to flesh, to brain waves, to light, to radiation, and such on to the point that we cannot fathom.... You can graph and plot, level wise, pretty much anything...

The fact that men came to the reluctant conclusion that women have the perogative to change their mind came from years of experience and knowledge of the futility of trying to figure it all out

:) Reluctant you say? Other men mayhaps... I know i have had the 'perogative' to change my mind since square one, and thus, i have never denied the same ability in any other matter eating air breathing being either. . Know Thyself. Know Allself. not so different, not so unique, very differnt, very unique... all imagined.

I don't stand with walls preventing my mind from growing,,, share with me brother, what your findings and thoughts are as to this flat earth subject you have brought up, you've intirgued me to delve further,,,

You speak of the way as though you have first hand experience of it, again,, just share...

I think i am on my way.... I also think my hair is brown. Should i be thinking differently than I Am? Where should i be relative to "The Way" other than On it? Off it? Beside? infront? Or inside it? Outisde it? you've already said i was "In" it, while i claimed to be on it. maybe your right, maybe we both are, maybe niether of us are and I don't actually know who or what or where I am.... Your words, wether you meant ot or not, seem to imply, my relation to My way, is something less, than it could be... in your eyes.... once again.... share bro...

...
just making fun of words... I make fun of everything... fun is 'best' imo. not one shread of evidence anywhere supports the notion that Anything is serious.... to butcher a decent 'almost' quote from god knows who....

:peace:

[Nick_A]

Hello JP

Seems I misunderstood when you wrote: "Quoting the bible really doesn't strengthen, or prove a thing to me. It's an ancient thing, written by primitive screwheads, who barely understood how fire worked, let alone the formation and workings of the universe"

It doesn't appear as though you are giving ancient man too much credit. :) There are different kinds of knowledge. There is associative kind that we learn in life and are relative to time and place. Then there is a more objective kind and we are born with it. This knowledge we remember rather than learn. Cosmological structure is like this. We are a microcosmos so this understanding is within us. Having become all lopsided, it is almost impossible to remember without a sincere desire and efforts to do so.

OK, no absolutes except of, of course, in matters of women :)). I completely agree that a person must not have any blind faith and any intriguing ideas should be verified.

The cosmos is something that is Meant to be a mystery in this life, and thus, I make no effort to try and assign a comparison to it with my own life . It's big and complex, uh huh. it's beautiful... yup, these i can see. But what i cannot , i care not.

I don't know what you mean by meant to be a mystery. I agree that it has become a mystery but I don't believe this is natural since the knowledge of it is something that is within us but not available on the surface. We have to be able to bring it forth IMO.

Mind is something.... better left empty, that it may be filled. All existance can be seen in levels.

Is an impartial mind the same as an empty mind? Maybe it is because our minds are empty and require something that they become filled with imagination.

I don't stand with walls preventing my mind from growing,,, share with me brother, what your findings and thoughts are as to this flat earth subject you have brought up, you've intrigued me to delve further,,,

I came to understand the misunderstanding of the flat earth primarily through the reading of a book by Prof. Jacob Needleman. He is one of those rare individuals that persists in modern education yet is free of its damaging effects. He is head of the Philosophy Dept. at San Francisco State University.

People debate Christianity all the time yet it doesn't exist for us and he is one of the few I've ever read that understands why. His "Lost Christianity" is a real Classic yet only a relative few who are not set in their ways could be open to it.

He understands, in the real sense, cosmology far greater than I do and it is within the cosmological perspective that I began to appreciate this idea of "flat earth".

Someone copied the first chapter of one of his books called: " A Sense of the Cosmos; The Encounter of Modern Science and Ancient Truth (Doubleday on this site.

The first chapter is called "The Universe". The third section is called "A conscious Universe" In it you will read what I have come to agree with as the reason for the flat earth controversy.

http://www.rawpaint.com/library/intro.html

I think i am on my way.... I also think my hair is brown. Should i be thinking differently than I Am? Where should i be relative to "The Way" other than On it? Off it? Beside? infront? Or inside it? Outisde it? you've already said i was "In" it, while i claimed to be on it. maybe your right, maybe we both are, maybe niether of us are and I don't actually know who or what or where I am.... Your words, wether you meant ot or not, seem to imply, my relation to My way, is something less, than it could be... in your eyes.... once again.... share bro...

The biggest obstacle as I've come to understand it is self deception. We don't know where to begin and once we do stumble on this truth IMO, we don't know how to begin. It starts I believe with the ancient Socratic axiom "Know Thyself". But how to appreciate the depth and importance of this for the serious seeker because it is here I believe where the essential truths are hidden within each of us. We get out of our own way when we become more free of our acquired defense mechanisms without acquiring new ones to replace them to protect ourselves from the inner truths we may have discovered

[jesupocaplypse]

Mayhaps what i should of said was that quoting the bible, means about as much to me as quoting any other book written, and doesn't add any concrete proof to whatever the topic was. The bible is no more 'divine' than Lord of The Rings, or the Claiming of Sleeping Beauty, or any other book written by man. fictional or non fictional. (IMO) Sure it might have some nuggets of truth in it. But so does everything.

I could've let someone else build my house. But i'd sooner have done it myself.
I could let someone else grow my food and cook my meals. But i'd sooner do it myself
I could let someone else solve my problems, and tell me what to believe, and how to act; But i'd sooner do so myself.
I could find 'truth' as it was discovered and written by someone else. But i'd sooner find it on my own.

I
--
-- Ancient man was ancient man. In the past. Not my concern except as unit of measurement. I cannot speak for the rest of the world. But ancient man couldn't hold a candle to me. Modern man is no better or worse overall, but if was going to seek assistance, or guidance as to how to build my house, i'd get such help from the people of today, in the here and now. seems to be more applicable. Not the ancients from the there and then. I'm sure they knew how to build fine houses, but i still wouldn't seek their knowledge as to how I should do it. The same goes for anything in (my) life. Fact is, I didn't get any help from modern man with my house (or my spirituality)... I taught myself how, and built it from the ground up, entirely on my own.

The Mystery of The Unknown, is one of the greatest driving forces in the world, a dangling carrot so to speak. Where would we be if it wasn't a mystery? and we completely understood it all. We'd probably be bored.
.... I dunno, and I don't really care.


--Nature abhors a Vacuum. <_< but there's a signifigant value to Naivety.

I don't put much if any thought or care or effort into trying to understand anything BUT myself.
Is the artist's easle that is in front of him, in his way?

I am my way, so I am in and on and out and around and of it in every way.

[Nick_A]

As far as the worth of the Bible and other Sacred Text and their ability to communicate something of great knowledge, this touches on the subject of real objective art which is another matter.

I could let someone else

I agree up to a point. It is up to us not to unnecessarily rely on others. The more you can do and the better you can do it in the conventional sense, the better one can discriminate between the real and unreal so as to be able to "do" in a more genuine sense. However, we do need each other as well. Of course the how, where, why, when etc., depends upo0n circumstances. You could say for example: "I could've had sex with someone else. But i'd sooner have done it myself." You can see how circumstances can play a large part in such a decision.

I cannot speak for the rest of the world. But ancient man couldn't hold a candle to me.

The trouble is we really cannot make such a statement without knowing what "primitive" man knew and knows.

I've been taking some excerpts from Jacob Needleman's "Lost Christianity" do make some points and here is one more.

Father Vincent was explaining his time in Africa working with some "primitive" people and said "I learned from these people far more than I taught them."

To make a long story short, he was working on building a school which was real hard labor. He didn't understand why but some elders became angry with him and finally, just before the building ws finished, they asked him to leave. He couldn't understand it.

He had a dream that night before he was to go which also contained a symbol he couldn't understand but the lucidity of the dream made him stay even though even his associates thought it better for him to go and not make waves.

Now came the day of the scheduled ceremony where the elders of the Tribal community were invited and hopefully they would come under the circumstances. Finally a procession was seen coming and the chief elder was seen "holding on top of a pole an image of the sun which I had seen in that dream! I mean to tell you, it was an exact image: the color same shade of magnenta, the same size, everything........................"

............"When I reflected later about all this I was amazed, but at the time, as it was happening, I calmly accepted it and played my role perfectly, without having to think about it. The chief himself wore no mask, but his face was motionless and frozen as though he of them all did not have to paint a godlike attitude on his face; he alone was godlike. I felt this meaning then, I didn't 'figure it out' but it proved to be more or less accurate.

It gradually dawned on me that we had badly misunderstood everything about the elders' actions. True they had demanded that I leave, but they didn't mean it geographically. They had come to the decision that we--especially me, for some reason, were 'people of the Father (as they expressed it), and that it was time for them to admit us into their way of life. What I took for anger was the only way they could act out toward me a certain ritual of passage...........................

So it appears that these "primitive" people knew how to cut the crap and needed Father Vincent's mask to go so that HE could join with them. How many MODERN people could do this? Frankly I find it hard to judge who is primitive and in what way.

I don't put much if any thought or care or effort into trying to understand anything BUT myself.
Is the artist's easle that is in front of him, in his way?

The artist's ability for expression is one thing. The ability to receive impartial impressions from from life is another. If both of are a high quality, the art can have value. Understanding one self is not the same as justifying oneself.

[jesupocaplypse]

Ahh, i speak not of wisdom, but of material knowledge. The ancients, primitives, whatever., IMO, were wiser than we. but we have much more knowledge. we have their knwoledge, PLUS everything we've learned since. that's what i was trying to refer to ... I kind of find this funny, because I for one, envy the ancients, the primitives, and their way of life. I'd sooner live in a jungle with a small community of people than here in a city. but i have too many strings holding me here.

However. "primitives" such as those folk in your example, arn't the ones who wrote those "sacred" texts. those that wrote them, were an entirely different breed of people. Either way, regardless of who wrote it or when it was written... far to much fear and hatred in it for me to be able to accept it as a source of truth. and not the slightest scrap of evidence to show it as being any more divine than any other story book. A means of population control is about all it adds up to, imo. fear will keep them inline.


Justify oneself? what an interesting concept... I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would feel a need to do such a thing. please explain further.

[Nick_A]

JP

Justify oneself? what an interesting concept... I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would feel a need to do such a thing. please explain further.

Actually it is more difficult to try to comprehend living without doing it. The point is we do not even realize how much we do it. We justify our opinion of ourselves by giving it value in comparison to others from purely emotional considerations. Consider what you just said for example:

However. "primitives" such as those folk in your example, arn't the ones who wrote those "sacred" texts. those that wrote them, were an entirely different breed of people. Either way, regardless of who wrote it or when it was written... far to much fear and hatred in it for me to be able to accept it as a source of truth. and not the slightest scrap of evidence to show it as being any more divine than any other story book.

You write this indicating somehow you know this to be true. Yet it is an emotional response from your view of the human condition. It justifies your belief that your beliefs are somehow true.

I'm not saying this is either wrong or right since it is how we are. But if a person for some reason desires to become more objective in the quest for understanding, they must begin to drop this emotional self justification that feels so nice, for the goal of becoming more impartial or less under the control of emotion. It all depends on personal goals.

[sahyo]

nick: You write this indicating somehow you know this to be true. Yet it is an emotional response from your view of the human condition. It justifies your belief that your beliefs are somehow true.

like?:

nick: You should stick with being an agnostic. At least this is safe.

[Nick_A]

Asheera

I appreciate your intent which is to show that I am not above it and I agree.

Please don't think that I have something against emotion because I value it a great deal. I just happen to believe that it is just as prone to error as the intellect.

The fact that I stress how much we are in the power of self deception is only because I believe that our species is capable of so much more that could be the case if it wasn't for self deception.

An intellectual mistake can often be easy to prove. Emotional judgements are much more difficult. Believe me, I've struggled with this myself and fall victim to it also. It aint easy being human.

Take the big basketball brawl that occured a little while ago where the fans were fighting players in Detroit. Before the game fans could have been waiting in line for autographs saying all sorts of nice things. Something happens and everyone's fighting. Is there anything intellectual in that? It is just an emotional reaction. On a larger scale wars break out like this. On a smaller scale family arguments break out because of moods. Many decisions are made purely from defensive emotion judgement. Yet it limits us so because we underestimate the value of emotion and what it can provide.

[jesupocaplypse]

aha mm hmm. I abovelay.

:D

[sahyo]

Please don't think that I have something against emotion because I value it a great deal. I just happen to believe that it is just as prone to error as the intellect.

seems emotioning-intellecting as though separate?

Take the big basketball brawl that occured a little while ago where the fans were fighting players in Detroit. Before the game fans could have been waiting in line for autographs saying all sorts of nice things. Something happens and everyone's fighting. Is there anything intellectual in that? It is just an emotional reaction. On a larger scale wars break out like this. On a smaller scale family arguments break out because of moods. Many decisions are made purely from defensive emotion judgement. Yet it limits us so because we underestimate the value of emotion and what it can provide.

can that type of emotioning happen without intellecting (imagining) i-u (mine-yours) right-wrong right (should-shouldn't)?

[Nick_A]

Asheera

can that type of emotioning happen without intellecting (imagining) i-u (mine-yours) right-wrong right (should-shouldn't)?

I don't think so but this is misleading. We are capable of different qualities of intellect. At its highest it is objective consciouosness which is beyond us other than in flashes. At its lowest level it is patterns of associative thought. it is like a recording that plays when called up. It is purely mechanical thought. You see something and the same thoughts begin. The emotion, though a separate function, may begin to follow these thoughts when we allow them to continue and produce complimentary negative emotional states. We are thinking in the same way so we have associated emotions. Actually the body responds in the same way and from these negative associative thoughts, the body may begin to slump over, a scowl appears along with unnecessary muscle tensions as the body attempts to become one with these thoughts.

The mechanical associative thoughts were what triggered the emotional and bodily responses producing the negative emotional state that allows us to throw beer at as we curse them out. We feel entitled. They deserved it and in this way we justify ourselves.

It is not always the thoughts that lead. Hatha Yoga is based on this for example. Bodily postures and movement are consciously adopted which call forth a higher quality of emotion manifesting in the corresponding more positive emotional state where you don't have the uncontrollable urge to throw a beer at another. In this instance, the body and not the thoughts lead.

The intellect, emotion , and physical can function together in a realistic response to external life but unnecessary fears and imagination have made it impossible so we live instead in internal chaos.

[tangsky420]

Originally posted by Nick_A@Dec 8 2004, 01:56 AM
JP

Justify oneself? what an interesting concept... I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would feel a need to do such a thing. please explain further.

Actually it is more difficult to try to comprehend living without doing it. The point is we do not even realize how much we do it. We justify our opinion of ourselves by giving it value in comparison to others from purely emotional considerations. Consider what you just said for example:

However. "primitives" such as those folk in your example, arn't the ones who wrote those "sacred" texts. those that wrote them, were an entirely different breed of people. Either way, regardless of who wrote it or when it was written... far to much fear and hatred in it for me to be able to accept it as a source of truth. and not the slightest scrap of evidence to show it as being any more divine than any other story book.

You write this indicating somehow you know this to be true. Yet it is an emotional response from your view of the human condition. It justifies your belief that your beliefs are somehow true.

I'm not saying this is either wrong or right since it is how we are. But if a person for some reason desires to become more objective in the quest for understanding, they must begin to drop this emotional self justification that feels so nice, for the goal of becoming more impartial or less under the control of emotion. It all depends on personal goals.
put it perfect form thank you that actually what i am trying to say

[sahyo]

>different qualities of intellect. At its highest it is objective consciouosness which is beyond us other than in flashes. <

not intellectual understanding :)

[sahyo]

>Actually the body responds in the same way and from these negative associative thoughts, the body may begin to slump over, a scowl appears along with unnecessary muscle tensions as the body attempts to become one with these thoughts.<

body doesn't attempt to become one with thoughts
....bodythought when thinking

[sahyo]

>The intellect, emotion , and physical can function together in a realistic response to external life<

"response"ing, only when imagining "external"/internal has ceased