How is that not close to what I said? It is better though. It would be beneficial to go and search what he exactly said. thank you
Hi Jon,
I don’t know if you mis-stated but it isn’t clear to me when you said –
>Jon: From where we stand, it’s most important to cultivate a sense of needing to do something to fix the situation. I said to accept what is unacceptable. But that’s not fully it. It’s to help fix the madness and the callousness. To fully adopt a program of self-immolation and/or virtual freedom and naiveté to help those close to us and even the whole world.
-Are you talking about yourself or more people than you?
-What is the original feeling from where you want to “cultivate a sense of needing to do something”?
-When you say “fix the madness and the callousness” – are you talking about yourself or other people’s madness and the callousness?
These are the points which are not clear to me.
The second part of your post will have to wait until tomorrow – it is past midnight here.
Cheers Vineeto
In the video, the findings via the measure of donations, was that a single starving child had a greater impact on the audience, than two starving children. As the number increased, and e.g. it was clear an entire generation was starving, the donations ”fell off a cliff”.
Human empathy has a standard deviation of around 0.2 in my rough estimation based on that video. It drops off hard and quick.
I was talking about me and Andrew.
I think it comes from wanting to feel good and be happy and harmless. I think giving myself a life’s purpose and happy and harmlessness being that purpose would be great for me.
Other people’s. But my madness and callousness, I think, is not being focused on being happy and harmless. Like that’s both crazy and callous. And the madness of the world and it’s callousness stems from other people prioritizing things other than happiness and harmlessness. So if I can cultivate a sense of being behooved to be happy and harmless for myself and to show to others that it’s possible then I think that’s a good life goal.
I appreciate your time.
Oh. Well that’s interesting, isn’t it. I can get that though. If it feels like something can be done then a will to do it emerges. As soon as it feels like nothing can be done then people stop caring. Which seems pretty efficient to me. Why care about something you can’t change! But as far as you and I go, I think we can change it. We can definitely change ourselves and if we’re not willing to do that then lets stop pretending we care about anything.
1 Like
Very well said!
That is the crux of everything! In my renewed quest to change radically, “if I am not willing, stop pretending “ is going straight to the pool room!
(“Straight to the pool room” from the movie “The Castle “ which is as close to a viable culture as Australia has produced,)
Not available in my country.
Wow. That’s surprising!
Vineeto: I snipped the bulk of your post, being a conglomerate of hearsay, rumours, guesses and political opinions from the popular press, which you conclude with –
Jon: I did say hysteria is systematically manufactured. And gave two example in which the left did just that.
Hi Jon,
You said this about hysteria, amongst many other things, in the post #1076, which was not the one I categorized as being “a conglomerate of hearsay, rumours, guesses and political opinions” (#1074).
-
Jon: But it is what it is. When it comes to politics and nationalism, I guess there are no standards. To accept an unacceptable fact is our goal.
Vineeto: How have you determined that all this you presented is “fact”?
Jon: Sorry. When I said ‘fact’, I should have said reality. As in, bad shit done by bad people resulting in not so good things. In that particular sentence I wasn’t referring to any specific bad things or any specific person or people.
Ah, understood. It’s worthwhile to make a clear difference between the reality of the real world, and facts, because the real world is ruled by feelings and instinctual passions whereas a fact is “a thing that is indisputably the case”. (Oxford Dictionary).
Richard: For a start, any belief is nonsensical. By its very nature a belief is not factually true … otherwise it would not need to be believed to be true. A fact is obvious; it is out in the open, freely available for all to see as being correct. To believe something to be true is to accept on trust that it is so. .A fact does not have to be accepted on trust … a fact is candidly so A fact is patently true, manifestly clear. A fact has actual verity, whereas a belief requires synthetic credence. It is a fact that I, as this body, am mortal. I will die in due course … this heart will stop beating, these lungs will cease breathing, this brain will quit thinking. The flesh will decompose, if buried, or will be dispersed, if burnt, as smoke and ash. There could be nothing more final, more conclusive, more complete, of an ending to me than this. So the belief in Immortality goes against all the factual, evidential actuality. It must, therefore, have its roots buried deep in the psyche, to be held so passionately by so many people. It is not merely the passing whim of a thoughtless few. It is something that people feel deeply to be true. It is dear to their heart’s desire.
Herein lies the clue to ascertain why this fancy has persisted: a feeling is not a fact. Feelings have led humankind astray for millennia, without ever being questioned as to whether they are the correct tools for determining the correctness of a matter. Feelings are held to be sacrosanct; they are given a credibility they do not deserve. They are seen to be the final arbiter in a contentious issue: “It’s a gut-feeling”, or “My intuition is never wrong”, or “It feels right”, and so on. (Richard’s Journal, Article 18).
When you clearly see the difference between a fact and reality (a conglomerate of beliefs, feelings, hearsay, rumours, guesses and opinions) you can gain much clarity in your assessment of what happens, both in the world around you and inside your own mind. You don’t have to follow every belief to its pathetic end (pathetic as in pertaining to the emotions).
Jon: To accept the unacceptable would have worked better.
As I explained in my previous post and will again in my next post, Richard and I are talking about emotionally “accept the unacceptable” for the sake of the integrity of your own intelligence. That means finding out the reasons in yourself why you get upset or righteously indignant, which is clearly an obstacle to feeling happy and harmless.
Think about it, even if you lived alone on a paradisical island you would still experience negative emotions, but then you couldn’t blame anyone else for having them. It is ‘you’, the passionate identity inside, which is continuously producing and maintaining ‘good’ and bad feelings in order to preserve ‘your’ very existence. Once you grasp this simple fact, you can start changing human nature in yourself as described on the AFT website.
As Andrew recently contemplated –
Andrew: I was nostalgia, and how in a PCE or Freedom, I wouldn’t be there and “what would take my place?”
It was a thought and feeling that “nothing” would take my place that seemed somewhat sad to me, but almost immediately I caught the extreme irony of being in anyway worried that nothing would take my place, considering just what a mess I make! All the years of anger and sadness, malice and sorrow, frustration and despondency! How would “nothing” be worse than that!!??
I genuinely laughed for a good five minutes, carefully avoiding appearing like a madman when a person passed the other way, but the proceeding to grin my face off with just how ridiculous it was to think and feel that “nothing” was something somehow worse than me! (link)
-
Vineeto: How have you determined that all this you presented is “fact”? Have you researched what you presented here to be established facts (something that happened the way it is told), (…) Or did you merely repeat what already confirms you pre-formed opinion and political and moral persuasion (as in “I picked my side after the Iraq invasion”)?
Jon: Have I researched whether Trump or Clinton and others knew of the sex trafficking? I have not. I know that neither of them did anything for those kids and it seems they should have known something was up. And both of those characters fit the mold though Trump with him owning Miss Teen USA and his various on the record Epstein comments, on the record sexualization of I believe two of his children: one as a baby and the other when she was a grown adult. Stuff like that. Really fits the mold. But no I haven’t researched exactly what he knew and when he knew it or whom personally victimized if anyone. As far as Jan 6 goes, I just know of the phone call to Raffensperger, the many lawsuits, the riot, the speeches preceding it, the pardons and the lack of (presented) evidence that there even was (sufficient) voting fraud and the plan to kick the election to the House for what’s called a contingency vote. That’s good enough for me but I have learned that sometimes the players themselves don’t give you their best arguments and though they may have the right conclusions they still seem like lying crazy people. For example, until I studied the Ukraine situation, it seemed to me all the republicans were just spreading conspiracy theories. And they were. But, nonetheless, their conclusion was right. So they were right (imo) but their reasoning was way off. So I do have experience with the truth of the matter not being what it seems. Like I often trust the advocates of the counter-position to give their best arguments. But sometimes they give terrible one and until you go and learn what the best arguments actually are, you unaware that are even good arguments. It’s a weird phenomenon but you can’t rule out that someone may actually be right even though they give nothing but bad arguments. (link)
Richard and myself followed current events for several years, and Richard was very apt to access some of the lesser known sources as well but there is rarely a situation where one can say with certainty what actually happened. As you say “So I do have experience with the truth of the matter not being what it seems”. The best thing you can do is not to believe either side of the political range because everyone has an investment to keep something hidden, and the each has reasons to make up stuff as well to discredit their opponent. I can look for sensible suggestions for action, and if promises are actually carried out … but that is as far as it goes. Besides, being non-political, I do not vote. It’s really the (unelected) public servants who run the country.
Btw, did you know that Raffensperger was coerced to hold back the votes – his son-in-law was killed in a “mysterious” car accident exactly at that time and the guilty driver never brought to justice. These guys play for keeps!
Of course, being actually free I have the benefit of having lost the capacity to believe – that even includes the weather channel nowadays; it’s never as bad as they make it out to be 
. I can only recommend to abandon any belief as soon as you discover an emotional investment in holding on to one side or the other of something which you don’t know for an indisputable fact. That may be any story you read or hear or a loyalty you automatically obey. However, keep in mind the fundamental proviso to only dismantle the social identity when pure intent is firmly in place (link).
As a feeling being ‘Vineeto’ found it much more fruitful to uncover ‘her’ own secrets ‘she’ was hiding, discover where ‘she’ was not honest with ‘herself’, where ‘she’ employed tricks and narratives in order not to change because at times it seemed to radical. But whenever ‘she’ did acknowledge something and abandoned a belief, a narrative, a loyalty, a dearly held truth, ‘she’ felt lighter, more sincere, more happy and more harmless. In short, it worked.
Cheers Vineeto
4 Likes
Jon: What did Richard say about shit like this? Something to the effect of accepting an unacceptable world as it is…
Vineeto: Can I emotionally accept that which is intellectually unacceptable?
This way intelligence need not be compromised … intelligence will no longer be crippled.
Jon: How is that not close to what I said? It is better though. It would be beneficial to go and search what he exactly said. thank you. (link)
Hi Jon,
Yes, that would be far more beneficial, particularly for yourself. When you read your own quote at the top, you can see the difference yourself. You are basically suggesting one should accept “shit like this”, “an unacceptable world as it is …”
Much more beneficial to apply it as it was intended.
Richard clearly makes a difference between emotionally accepting (not getting angry or sad or upset) about what is happening, while a lot of happenings are still “intellectually unacceptable”. Human beings are still run by instinctual animal passions … even though now there is a way to change that in oneself.
*
Vineeto: -Are you talking about yourself or more people than you?
Jon: I was talking about me and Andrew.
Ok. Just remember that finding out how you ‘tick’ in order to better enjoy and appreciate being alive is something only you can do. Sharing notes can certainly add to the enjoyment of doing it. Also, there is something I remember from ‘Vineeto’ – “if he can do it, so can I”.
-
Vineeto: -What is the original feeling from where you want to “cultivate a sense of needing to do something”?
Jon: I think it comes from wanting to feel good and be happy and harmless. I think giving myself a life’s purpose and happy and harmlessness being that purpose would be great for me.
Mmh, when you say “I think”, it indicates you are not sure if it was this or something else. When you set out to improve the art of paying increasing attention to how you feel (affectively), while you go about your business of living, then you can more easily pinpoint what it is exactly that in this instant caused your mood to drop from feeling good (if it did) – and then get back to feeling good.
Richard: Once the specific moment of ceasing to feel good is pin-pointed, and the silliness of having such an incident as that (no matter what it is) take away one’s enjoyment and appreciation of this only moment of being alive is seen for what it is – usually some habitual reactive response – one is once more feeling good … but with a pin-pointed cue to watch out for next time so as to not have that trigger off yet another bout of the same-old same-old. This is called nipping it in the bud before it gets out of hand … with application and diligence and patience and perseverance one soon gets the knack of this and more and more time is spent enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive. And, of course, once one does get the knack of this, one up-levels ‘feeling good’, as a bottom line each moment again, to ‘feeling happy and harmless’ … and after that to ‘feeling excellent’.
The more one enjoys and appreciates being just here right now – to the point of excellence being the norm – the greater the likelihood of a PCE happening … a grim and/or glum person has no chance whatsoever of allowing the magical event, which indubitably shows where everyone has being going awry, to occur. Plus any analysing and/or psychologising and/or philosophising whilst one is in the grip of debilitating feelings usually does not achieve much (other than spiralling around and around in varying degrees of despair and despondency or whatever) anyway.
The wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition is marked by enjoyment and appreciation – the sheer delight of being as happy and harmless as is humanly possible whilst remaining a ‘self’ – and the slightest diminishment of such felicity/ innocuity is a warning signal (a flashing red light as it were) that one has inadvertently wandered off the way.
Footnote: What the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago would do is first get back to feeling good and then, and only then, suss out where, when, how, why – and what for – feeling bad happened as experience had shown ‘him’ that it was counter-productive to do otherwise.
What ‘he’ always did however, as it was often tempting to just get on with life then, was to examine what it was all about within half-an-hour of getting back to feeling good (while the memory was still fresh) even if it meant sometimes falling back into feeling bad by doing so … else it would crop up again sooner or later.
Nothing, but nothing, can be swept under the carpet. (Richard, AF List, No. 68c, 31 May 2005).
(Richard, This Moment of Being Alive).
It’s best to read the article in the original to get the benefit of all the informative tool-tips, especially in those quoted paragraphs.
As you can see, when you read the description, you can do all this unilaterally, you don’t need anyone or anything to change for you to start improving your own enjoyment and appreciation of being alive.
-
Vineeto: When you say “fix the madness and the callousness” – are you talking about yourself or other people’s madness and the callousness?
Jon: My madness and callousness, I think, is not being focused on being happy and harmless. Like that’s both crazy and callous. And the madness of the world and it’s callousness stems from other people prioritizing things other than happiness and harmlessness. So if I can cultivate a sense of being behooved to be happy and harmless for myself and to show to others that it’s possible then I think that’s a good life goal.
Why make it so complicated as if it were a duty to “cultivate a sense of being behooved to be happy and harmless for myself”? The straightforward question is – do you want to feel good? You know that is feels good to feel good, so where is the problem? And that in itself is worth contemplating.
When you find out more about the art of enjoying and appreciating you start to realise that being genuinely happy, i.e. unconditionally happy, includes being harmless as well. Being harmful, malicious, gleeful, selfish, self-centred doesn’t feel really good, it leaves at least a bad taste in your mouth, so to speak. It is far more enjoyable to experience the felicitous and innocuous feelings (happiness, delight, joie de vivre/ bonhomie, friendliness, amiability, consideration and so on) – hence it wouldn’t need a ‘cultivation’ to wanting to do it.
But maybe there is a belief, a conditioning, that states ‘thou shalt not be happy else you’ll be punished, or something similar? Something such as a guilt for being alive or taking up space? Check out the conversation I had with Andrew on this topic of guilt, he said it helped him drop a big burden. (link and the following posts).
Jon: I appreciate your time. (link)
You are very welcome, Jon.
Cheers Vineeto
2 Likes