.jpg.f3a97da5c3f5d8a9004f37c55f50d512.jpg)
MetaSage
-
Posts
234 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MetaSage
-
-
-
On 3/26/2024 at 10:16 PM, Phil said:
Good! Thanks
Soon!
-
You dead without it.
-
Take appropriate action.
-
-
9 hours ago, Robed Mystic said:
Well, as a mental illness i think its just feeling depressed. Considering the possiblity of a negative future isn't depression per se, its more just negative thinking.
Don't overlook it. You're saying depression is depression, which doesn't say much.
When depressed, you're somehow projecting yourself and your life in time and see no hope, and as a result might feel stuck, powerless, etc. Relating to the possibility of a future is an essential component of it, the activity that causes it.
Can you be present and depressed? Take a look.
-
Thinking or considering the possibility of a negative future is fundamentally what depression is about.
Which is why when certain things inspire hope, you look forward to the future with anticipation, for some sense of accomplishment.
-
You love me
Love loves love
Loving loving loving
-
You recognize it and do it
-
How real is the work for you?
Are you pretending?
Is it wishful thinking or your experience?
-
Sharing from AI:
The tendency for people to engage in arguments, debates, and conflicts, often for extended periods, rather than focusing on introspection and self-improvement, is a multifaceted issue that encompasses psychological, sociological, and evolutionary perspectives. Here's a closer look at some of the key factors involved:
Psychological Factors
Cognitive Biases: Human cognition is prone to a range of biases such as confirmation bias, where individuals favor information that confirms their preexisting beliefs. This can lead to entrenched positions and resistance to change.
Emotional Investment: People often become emotionally invested in their beliefs and viewpoints. This emotional attachment can make it difficult to consider alternative perspectives, leading to arguments and conflicts.
Identity and Beliefs: For many, their beliefs and opinions are closely tied to their sense of self and identity. Challenges to these beliefs are perceived as personal attacks, prompting defensive reactions rather than introspective consideration.
Sociological Factors
Group Dynamics: Social identity theory suggests that individuals derive part of their identity from the groups to which they belong. This can lead to an "us vs. them" mentality, driving conflict and reducing the inclination for self-reflection.
Cultural Norms: In some cultures, debate and confrontation are seen as positive ways to engage with ideas and forge social bonds. This cultural context can discourage introspection in favor of outward expression of disagreement.
Social Media and Communication: The structure of social media platforms can exacerbate conflicts through echo chambers and anonymity. These platforms often reward engagement through controversy rather than contemplation and understanding.
Evolutionary Factors
Competition for Resources: Evolutionarily, humans have competed for resources, leading to conflict. This competitive instinct can manifest in modern contexts as arguments and debates over ideas and beliefs, not just physical resources.
Status and Hierarchies: Human social structures have historically been hierarchical, with status often achieved through dominance in conflict, whether physical or intellectual. This can drive individuals to engage in arguments as a means of status-seeking.
The Path to Introspection
The shift towards introspection and self-improvement requires overcoming these deeply ingrained tendencies. It involves cultivating awareness of one's own cognitive biases, emotional triggers, and the sociocultural factors that influence behavior. Strategies to promote this shift include:
Mindfulness and Meditation: Practices that increase self-awareness and the ability to observe one's thoughts and emotions without immediate reaction.
Education on Cognitive Biases: Learning about cognitive biases and logical fallacies can help individuals recognize these patterns in their own thinking.
Encouraging Empathy: Developing the ability to understand and share the feelings of others can reduce conflict and promote more inward reflection.
Promoting Dialogue: Encouraging open, respectful dialogue rather than debate can help shift focus from winning an argument to understanding different perspectives.
Ultimately, the move from external conflict to internal reflection is a personal and collective journey that requires effort, education, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths about oneself and society.
-
Conflict seems to be unavoidable. Disparity in self-agendas.
Intellectually, it makes total sense that conflict isn't wanted. In day to day life, it occurs regardless.
Live closely with someone for a certain amount of time and conflict will tend to arise in one form or another, unless the relationship is kept incredibly superficial.
-
Arrogance seems to be quite present in humans and other apes.
Not so much the obvious, external manifestation of it, but a huge, although subtle, pretension and self-certainty. Each of our worldviews are tacitly and unconsciously taken as "true" at some level, and most of us act out from that "arrogance".
Whether you think God or the Big Bang created the universe, that love is everything, that the universe is expanding towards greater consciousness, that society is mad, that the masses are stupid, that you have a personal destiny to fulfil, etc.
-
-
On some level, everyone is afraid of other.
-
1 hour ago, WhiteOwl said:
What criteria is followed for what?
Listening or fingering a teacher.
-
-
3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:
There's a little bit of fantasy in grounded communication and a little bit of grounded communication in fantasy. This idea that a teacher is standing on solid ground is a myth. Spirituality is not like science. You could create any spirituality and ultimately everyone has the right to create their own spirituality. You are the authority, and teachers are merely influences on you or examples for you to consider on your spiritual path. Copying a teacher is like learning someone else's lick in music, you don't want to play it verbatim but you want to use it to create better licks of your own. You want to be able to play the music that comes out of you. Spirituality is both integrous and original.
Communication is based on an authentic experience, or else it is manipulation. Fantasy isn't grounded on anything "real", factual, objective or solid.
-
51 minutes ago, Phil said:
I’m not convinced you actually read what @Jonas Long posted so to speak. Kinda seems like enabling or pro-delusion. Not you of course, just the comment.
I didn't, I got a sense of what the comments were about by taking an overview.
Cleaned up the comment. Still, why enabling or pro-delusion?
-
On 10/1/2022 at 3:36 PM, Phil said:
The truth is you are never going to be happy because it simply, fundamentally & literally is not possible. You’re never going to be aware. You’re never going to be conscious. You’re never going to be awake. You will never actually be kind, selfless, loving, whole or good because it’s impossible.
Why? I get a sense of what you mean, but still would like clear elaboration.
-
1 hour ago, Jonas Long said:
Dunno where you got that about me tbh
Generalizing.
15 minutes ago, WhiteOwl said:@MetaSageNo idea what you are on about or what to reply. Do you have a question or? Maybe you can ask a bit more direct
A rant about students and teachers. The tendency to look for fantasy rather than grounded communication.
Basically, what criteria is followed? Agreeableness, likability, honesty, etc?
-
You'd likely not find ruthless approaches such as Rinzai zen useful nor would you seriously consider their reasoning for teaching that way, as they wouldn't fit your expectations, preferences and worldviews.
People prefer likeable and agreeable teachers and for them to spoon-feed you lovey-dovey stuff -that's much preferred over plain honesty, specifically when it fits their image of what a guru should be and behave like. Not saying it's necessarily the case here, although the point I'm making applies more widely. Certainly, you wouldn't listen or pay attention to troubled teachers such as Alan Watts or Chogyam Trungpa. But hey, if it sounds good and is agreeable...
Social games, popularity contests, mutual agreements to reach a consensus reality, validating each other's beliefs... People participate a lot in these.
-
-
53 minutes ago, Phil said:
See what is true and what is a belief in accordance with non-conceptual direct experience.
Inspection is now or not now, as in accordance with direct experience there isn’t a future.
Pain is of the body.
Suffering is of beliefs.
Knowing beliefs are true is arrogance.
Arrogance is pure suffering.
Suffering is not felt by anyone (else).
Knowing beliefs about pain & suffering are true, in spite of emotions felt, in the face of the guidance felt, is hell.
Hell: To cover, conceal, save. One who covers or hides something.
Arrogance: A manifest feeling of superiority of one's worth or importance, combined with contempt of others. Presumption, pride, haughtiness. Assuming, overbearing, insolent.
I'd challenge the assumption that pain is of the body. Pain is an activity that you do. If you can grasp its nature, you can stop generating it. Some sensation would be there, but no pain as you wouldn't be creating it.
Of course, this is an intellectual endeavor. Contemplating pain would be required.
Magic truffles nausea
in The Path
Posted
Once made tea with truffles and it didn't work out; had to eat the truffles.
Might have screwed up the process somehow.