Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
re. to trading spouses
Fear and its offsprings, like insecurity and anxiety, often get a bum rap. The Taoist view rejects nothing - not even nothing. (sorry, I couldn't resist 
). We know the benefits of fear by its other offsprings, like care and concern. A healthy degree of concern is what drives us to be watchful in each moment. Lazy unmindfulness only occurs when we don't care. And, we don't care when we feel no sense of [chref=72]awe[/chref] (the source of 'fear').
If we ponder these two sides of fear, insecurity on one hand and concern on the other, we can see how important balance is. Too much and we become neurotic 'cowards' or, believe it or not, 'bullies' (fear drives the bully). Too little and we become lazy hedonistic bums where only the pleasures of the senses wake us up.
Balance is key. How do we maintain balance? I suspect we first need to realize our imbalance. That in such and such a way, or time, we are out of balance. Then comes the even trickier part, we have to 'care' enough to lean the other way, but not 'care' too much and go to the other extreme.
Now, if there is any such thing as free will, this is where it should show up. But then I would say, "No this is not free will, but rather just realizing deeply down what I really want in life, i.e., what I really care about". But remember, I must 'care' not to 'care' too much, eh? Tricky! Geez, it always comes back to this. Like it or not, one way or the other, our lives are driven by fear. :shock:
:idea: Oh, speaking of fear, I've noticed two other things: Focused fear and need blind side me. Peripheral fear and need awaken me. Staying focused on the periphery helps balance life. Is this one way to describe mindfulness?
). We know the benefits of fear by its other offsprings, like care and concern. A healthy degree of concern is what drives us to be watchful in each moment. Lazy unmindfulness only occurs when we don't care. And, we don't care when we feel no sense of [chref=72]awe[/chref] (the source of 'fear').If we ponder these two sides of fear, insecurity on one hand and concern on the other, we can see how important balance is. Too much and we become neurotic 'cowards' or, believe it or not, 'bullies' (fear drives the bully). Too little and we become lazy hedonistic bums where only the pleasures of the senses wake us up.
Balance is key. How do we maintain balance? I suspect we first need to realize our imbalance. That in such and such a way, or time, we are out of balance. Then comes the even trickier part, we have to 'care' enough to lean the other way, but not 'care' too much and go to the other extreme.
Now, if there is any such thing as free will, this is where it should show up. But then I would say, "No this is not free will, but rather just realizing deeply down what I really want in life, i.e., what I really care about". But remember, I must 'care' not to 'care' too much, eh? Tricky! Geez, it always comes back to this. Like it or not, one way or the other, our lives are driven by fear. :shock:
:idea: Oh, speaking of fear, I've noticed two other things: Focused fear and need blind side me. Peripheral fear and need awaken me. Staying focused on the periphery helps balance life. Is this one way to describe mindfulness?
Comments
I became much much less disturbed (i.e. knocked off balance) by humanity's comings and goings when I took to heart the reality that we are simply animals, one species among many, who are driven by our instinctive nature just like all the other animals on this planet. We are no different. The circumstances of civilization make it difficult for us to maintain natural balance, as would be the case for any animal in similar circumstances.
Of course, we see ourselves as 'intelligent' and 'highly' evolved, you know 'created in God's image' kind of special, so we expect idealist and unrealistic things of ourselves that we don't expect from the 'lower' animals. Why? It is all part of the 'hoodwink' to keep masses of people, i.e., civilization, in line.
No wonder we need humor - and tears - to deal with the ironic 'bed' we have made for ourselves....
Have a nice day
I'm afraid that I have a alternate contender for dictator to run against you - although I'm not sure that he would go down as a benign one. One of my colleagues at work, great guy, (we think he's joking - probably) maintains that he'll will establish crucifixion sites all the way up the A1 of all the people who refuse to agree with him. He maintains that this period of shock and awe will be limited and then everything will be a great deal better afterwards!
The list of those to be so treated grows and shrinks depending on how we all feel - after all you have to go along with somebody who might be your dictator sometime soon
I tend to agree with you --- that we are really just animals. But when you said that civilzation makes natural balance more difficult, I couldn't help thinking, "If we are really just animals then why is it that we have created such complex socities, and why would we (most of us anyways) find it nearly impossible to live wihtout them?"
Animals usually to do only what is in their instinctive nature. Wouldn't creating societies that disrupt balance be counterproductive and go against all our natural insticts?
1) Complex society has been evolving hand in hand with technology over the past 50,000 years at an exponential rate. It really picked up 10,000 ago with our adoption of agriculture. So, we have gradually come to this point. This is no different from termites who gradually evolved a complex social structure which they too can not live without. From our point of view, we are vastly different from termites. From the termite's point of view, they are vastly different from humans. So?
Living things in general, and humans in particular, tend to make mountains out of mole hills of difference. This is a survival trait of consciousness. My point: biology hoodwinks us into a biased view of how 'things' are. From the [chref=56]mysterious sameness[/chref] point of view, it is not a stretch to say "we are termites, termites are us (humans)".
2) Instinct directs animals as individuals not as a 'group'. The genetic traits (instincts) are passed to discrete individuals not to a 'group'. Each individual acts according to its instinct. For social animals such actions are generally favorable to the 'group'. All action is driven by 'me', not by 'we', even though 'we' benefit (and the 'we' play a huge sensory input role which triggers 'my' instinct').
No 'one' created our society. It evolved gradually over millennia through individuals instinctive response to their immediate circumstances. No 'intelligence' is guiding this process. For example, the dinosaur's mass and girth evolved gradually and naturally, but, in the end, it became "counterproductive" to their well being. They didn't know an asteroid would hit the earth. Likewise, the ancient person who invented the stone ax never dreamed it would lead to nuclear weapons. You might say that Nature is experimenting, playing, messing around, throwing stuff up on the wall and seeing what sticks... not that Nature cares what stick or not.
Instincts develop to cope with circumstances that exist during the time period of their evolution. When circumstances change, instincts don't automatically and instantly conform to the change. Instinct change occurs over generations of genetic selection,... and, via the [chref=1]gateway of the manifold secrets[/chref], of course.
It can be proven scientifically that much of human behavior, more than anyone had ever predicted, is directed by DNA, but it is also a fact that our genes are programmed to adapt to our enviornment and change over time in response to the events in our lives.
This isn't really "free will", but it does suggest that not everything we do is not base soley on instict.
I just read a book (Carl: I'll send it to you!) that said that some (not all) genes are turned on and off by the environment. That's how seasonal reproduction works. Take chickens (please). As the days grow shorter, the hens stop laying eggs. As the days grow shorter, the DNA or gene (I forget) to reproduce is turned off. It's like genetic boolean logic: if the day is long then lay eggs; else....
Pretty cool, huh?
The book's entitled "Monkeyluv."
Good you're stirring the pot Jillian...
I suppose this illustrates how problematic communication can be in general, and the written form in particular. There is nothing like a bit of misunderstanding to keep us on our toes, eh? Just imagine how utterly peaceful (and boring?) life would be if we all understood each other perfectly. I imagine that perfect understanding must be one description of Heaven.
PS: I should add that I don't regard DNA, instinct, or anything else to be 'the answer'. I just use these science based views to debunk some of the culturally partisan myths that blind side us. That leaves life a little more [chref=14]indistinct and shadowy[/chref], which doesn't hurt if you want to feel [chref=1]the gateway of the manifold secrets[/chref]. Of course, that feeling disturbs many of us, and drives us to cling to an 'answer', whether based in science or myth (religious, or otherwise).