Harmlessness - pacifism vs. actualism

[rick]

Reading through the recent entries of the journal of Bub it occurred to me that the word “harmless” can be misconstrued by both the uninitiated and the initiated; reading some old quotes of Peter I gained the impression that even he didn’t have a good handle on it.

But it’s simple. This is another one of those “per actualism terminology” instances.

RESPONDENT: Are you saying that its possible to be stern and forceful without being angry?
RICHARD: Indeed so … to actually be harmless (be free of malice) means one does not have to pretend to be harmless (be a pacifist).

Important to note that to be harmless doesn’t mean one refrains from either incidentally or deliberately harming other people, it just means one doesn’t do it out of spite or malice. Hurting other humans is still fair game.

÷

Richard would say that he cannot psychologically harm anyone. By this he means that he cannot manifest malicious vibes; and it is these, along with “psychic currents,” which he says has the ability to induce (psychological) suffering in others.

[Richard]: [T]o be harmless as per actualism lingo (being free of malice) is beneficial both to oneself – plus it feels unpleasant (hedonically) to feel malicious (affectively) anyway – as well to others due to being unable to induce suffering either in oneself or another, via affective vibes and psychic currents, and vice versa.

Yet, I argue, there are many other ways to hurt humans, psychologically and physically, aside from affective vibes and psychic currents.

For example, it is advantageous to induce psychological pain in the form of shame and guilt upon those who repeatedly behave in an antisocial manner – else gaols would be more overcrowded than they already are (the given rationale). We do this as a matter of course with children, instilling in them the mechanism by which they can self-inflict that form of psychological harm upon themselves for when we’re not around to do so; we call that guardian mechanism a “conscience.” Lastly, for the grown ups, if shame and guilt, or other non-physical deterrents, fail to correct or alter the behavior, then physical force is required (up to and including the termination of living status).

Incidentally, that’s what punishment and penalty essentially mean: pain.

(Penalty is from Old French penal, which is from Latin poenalis, from poena meaning pain.)

[Kub933]

In the end harmlessness has to go alongside sensibility, I think this is the boundary that has to be explored. If harmlessness is taken as a moral then one is not being sensible because sooner or later one either hurts oneself or the other anyways, or goes along with various BS that is not doing anyone any favours.

[claudiu]

I like how feeling-being Vineeto put it here:

Now I just find the most sensible way of being happy and harmless which, of course, includes considering everyone who is part of the particular situation. For me, this also involves cleaning myself up so I can be free of misery and malice – not contributing to the chaos people usually create for each other. Everybody seems to live everybody else’s life, perpetuating the cycle of misery by consolation, sympathy, empathy and compassion – thus helping people to stay helpless. I can supply practical help if someone asks me to, but I am not responsible for anybody else’s happiness and neither is anybody else responsible for my happiness. It makes life much less complicated if I stop trying to find the solution for ‘S.E.P.’, ‘Someone Else’s Problem’ and focus my intent and effort on becoming happy and harmless.
A Bit of Vineeto

You consider everyone part of the situation - including yourself - while keeping in mind everyone is responsible for their own happiness.

Of course being malicious can engender a reaction and then you are somewhat culpable — but I find even with no speck of ill will, the other can become quite malicious indeed.

I’ve come to recognize there is no culpability here, it’s their choice how they react and respond ultimately.

[claudiu]

Relevant here: The actualism method - the ongoing enjoyment and appreciation of this moment of being alive - #42 by geoffrey

@geoffrey chides someone for acting like a “child” and his harmlessness is questioned.

He outlines the reasons for it — it depends on what one is prioritizing. If emotional comfort of the other, not the best course of action. If to help them achieve actual freedom — then it is sensible what he did and why.

[emp]

I started looking for a story from Richard, maybe someone knows which one I’m referring to? I believe he’s having a conversation with his mother-in-law and for one reason or another she ends up being hurt.

My memory is doing the story no justice, but I found another bit of text I enjoyed instead:

RICHARD: What the word ‘harmless’ refers to, on both The Actual Freedom Trust web site and mailing list, is being sans malice – just as being happy refers to being without sorrow – thus provided there be no malice generating/ driving/ motivating one’s thoughts, words, or actions, being no longer capable of fulfilling a previously made pledge can in no way be going against being harmless.

None of this is to deny that another’s feelings may, and can be, self-induced to feel hurt as a result … the simple fact of the matter is that if they choose to harbour such feelings that is their business.

Put simply: one does not become either actually or virtually free of the human condition just to be guided by and/or run by other people’s feelings … […]

[rick]

@emp I got you -

RESPONDENT: When I originally told my mom, she was ecstatic, and if I were to tell her that I changed my mind, I fear that I would cause harm, which goes against being ‘harmless.’
RICHARD: What the word ‘harmless’ refers to, on both The Actual Freedom Trust web site and mailing list, is being sans malice – just as being happy refers to being without sorrow – thus provided there be no malice generating/driving/motivating one’s thoughts, words, or actions, being no longer capable of fulfilling a previously made pledge can in no way be going against being harmless.
None of this is to deny that another’s feelings may, and can be, self-induced to feel hurt as a result … the simple fact of the matter is that if they choose to harbour such feelings that is their business.
Put simply: one does not become either actually or virtually free of the human condition just to be guided by and/or run by other people’s feelings
RESPONDENT: Is this fear part of the social conditioning package?
RICHARD: Aye … many years ago the identity inhabiting this body was conversing with ‘his’ then mother-in-law, painstakingly explaining why’ he’ was no longer able to do something – something which eludes memory nowadays – and was both surprised and pleased to hear the following words ‘he’ spoke in response to her reproachful ‘oh, you have hurt my feelings’ (manipulative) reply to ‘his’ carefully explicated account:
• ‘Then why carry [harbour/nurse] such feelings … surely you leave yourself open to all manner of hurt by doing so?’ Needless is it to add that ‘he’ was to ask himself that very question on many an occasion from that day forwards?
Mailing List 'AF' Respondent No. 83

[emp]

Ace, thank you @rick. I can only contend that DuckDuckGo might not be the best for searching the AF site.

[rick]

You’re welcome @emp
The only reliable means of searching the AF site is the search function of a .txt reader that combs all the words from the AF site uploaded in .txt format. Google, DuckDuckGo, and Yahoo are shit for returning an exhaustive list of results, even with using exact words or phrasings. Using them all in tandem will be more successful - DuckDuckGo will return hits that Google failed to return, and vice versa.

But even this method is unreliable. Better to just gather all the words and put them in .txt format.

[edzd]

@rick

But even this method is unreliable. Better to just gather all the words and put them in .txt format.

Smart - were you able to download the entire website somehow? Other than the lite version? Also, I’ve had some good success with Bing to find quotes that Google wasn’t combing.

[rick]

Right, using Bing is another way to draw out some results that the others may have missed.

There’s no download like that. I’m no programmer so it was a painstaking process of manually copy-pasting the text on every page and in every tool-tip (that was the most tedious part). I won’t share the fruit of my labor here as that may violate the AF site’s use restrictions. That said, it was a rewarding little project - something I can recommend for others to consider undertaking for personal benefit. I invariably ended up reading a lot and thinking deeply about the content as I went about it.

[Kub933]

What happens when harmlessness is merely a moral This really does sum up Britain rather well lol