posted September 20, 2004 09:50 PM              

It is only Man’s poor primitive structures that are in disarray.

Those who fear authority and seek personal freedom should know that every living creature is free to follow his will and that the only authority he need ever obey is vested in that will.

If your life lacks order, it is because you have not yet accepted nature’s order, God’s order.

If you do not feel free, it is because you have not yet declared your own freedom, you are waiting for it to be given to you.

You will wait forever.

posted September 21, 2004 12:46 AM              

Oh, my! Hey, maybe I can have a civil discussion here in GU! What a treat that would be! Any chance you can keep jwhop out of this string?

I'd just love to give you a respones, but we have to clear something up first. I think you've been misled ("subliminally programmed by massive repetition" is more the phrase that comes to mind) by jwhop; I'm not an 'anarchist', at least not by self-association or self-labelling; I prefer to think of myself purely as an individual with his own beliefs on any given subject. I also prefer -- no I insist on -- thinking of others as just that. So if you could not lump me in with a bunch of other mislabelled individuals as has so wearingly been done in this forum, I would much appreciate it.

I will answer your questions by going through your post point-by-point, but please don't think this is an adversarial methid, mmmkay? I simply want to be sure that I address the questions you're asking me as thoroughly as possible. This is an exposition, which you asked for -- not an argument.

(Funny how I feel the need for so many disclaimers, isn't it? I wonder how that situation came into being?)

quote:

---

I cannot help but think though, that as a part of the ordered universe, people themselves strive to structure their own environments, even if only for the needs of the minority at times.

---

I agree. We do seek after structure. But can it be taken too far? I suspect that that is also true.

Structure and its seeming opposite, chaos, are things I think about. I am not very mathematically inclined, but I have read some interesting papers written by those who are, and one thing that mathematical scientists are now discovering is that if you order something perfectly enough, chaos emerges as a natural consequence, and vice-versa -- if you randomize something well enough, order emerges as a consequence. I see this as mathematics' reflection of one of the Uni-versal Laws that we metaphysicians have long held to be true: that no thing can exist without its opposite. There will never nor can ever be perfect order or perfect chaos; rather, both are a healthy and natural aspect of all Life.

For a really clear example of the dangers of too much order, read Madele\eine L'Engle's A Wrinkle in Time, if you haven't already. (Linda Goodman's favorite book!)

quote:

---

I guess one example that comes to mind is what to do with the criminals of the world if there is no structure set up to deal with the results of their actions.

---

Ah, now here is the heart of the matter, am I right? From my p.o.v., this statement has a problem in and of itself -- the pluralizing of the word 'criminal'. I don't think there is any need to do anything with the criminalS of the world. But if you bring me *one* *specific* criminal, I would probably have an opinion of what to do with him (or her).

I think that there is a danger in even perceiving people as groups. This is the age of statistical analyses drawn from large computerized databases of information -- something that may have its uses, but also, I think, a largely dehumanizing process. Consider another quote by Paul Williams:

quote:

---

Each person’s needs are different.
Increasing awareness means increasing awareness of this fact.

---

It is the grouping of people, or at least, too much grouping of people, that creates the minority you mentioned in your previous statement. An individual can be neither a majority nor a minority. He simply is. If all people were dealt with on as individual a basis as possible, rather than as statistical groups, minorities would not suffer, for they would hardly exist!

As to what I think can be done about "criminalS", check out the post I made between Emerson's and Thoreau's essays in the Civil Disobedience string.

And again, classifying people into the two groups of "criminals" and "law-abiding citizens" is a dehumanizing process; from the study of psychology I have learned that most people (with a few really rare exceptions) are good people -- that is, they believe themselves to be -- and most of their "evil" actions are rooted in the desire to avoid their pain and the ignorance of how to deal with it properly. Christ-like love of every individual erases such dualistic judgements (good guy/bad guy) from our minds and hearts, and does not allow us to see people as "criminalS". This is an EXTREMELY difficult state of mind to achieve -- probably the most difficult goal in the entire Uni-verse to attain -- but I think it's the proper direction for us to move in, mentally, emotionally, and Spiritually.

You said that the problem you posed seemed to require more structure; in a nutshell, I personally think it requires less.

quote:

---

What's your take on the whole thing? Not just theoretically but as a practicality.

---

Well, that is an impossible question for me to answer, because I see no division between theory and practice. What the body practices must be conceived of first in the Mind, so...? The Buddhists have a wonderfully simple way of expressing this: "Correct thinking produces correct action."

Hope that helps explain where I'm coming from. Thanks for asking! I never tire of explaining this to someone, because every time I do, I am re-Minded of these truths myS-elf.

If you have any more questions or have an opposing viewpoint you'd like to debate in that courteous, objective manner of yours that we Librans find so admirable, please post back!

Love and Light to you, Quiksilver!

--Paras

posted September 22, 2004 08:26 PM              

Can't wait to hear what you have to say about my little ideas. It will be so nice to have a sensible discussion of them with someone! I may learn something new!

posted September 23, 2004 10:45 PM              

And with that, your point number 1 (namely, that you are not to be referred to as an "anarchist") is duly noted! I am now clear on that and can proceed to the heart of the matter!

Side note: *I laughed out loud after reading the "mmmkay" thing. Reminded me of that character in "South Park", a show which I happen to find very offensive but extremely funny. Hey, at least they're not biased in their slug fests! The dirt gets dished out to everyone pretty evenly.*

MMMMKAY! Forward and onward! Or is it onward and forward? Ah, who cares....

So, the next concept you addressed is that of order and chaos. I am glad you brought this up. It is something I think about MORE than frequently. I would say, it is on some level, in the back of my mind each and every day. So, there may never be perfect order or perfect chaos, you say. I tend to more readily believe that out of chaos/randomness order emerges. But the other way around? I do not understand that idea as much. Maybe I am not thinking hard enough. I might be able to comprehend further if presented with an illustrative example.... You mentioned that you have read up on the subject matter. Would you be able to suggest an article for a pseudo-novice such as myself?

You also, I noticed, wrote "we metaphysicians". Meaning, I assume, that you are one? I know of metaphysics very generally. But what does a metaphysician do, exactly? (Uh, oh. I am be further exhibiting my relative ignorance on this topic. Is "metaphysician even a word?) Or are there several thing that a metaphysician does - as comparable to the varied branches of medicine, for example? When did you first endeavor to become one? Do you have a mentor?

To answer your question, I am embarrassed to admit that I have not yet read "A Wrinkle in Time". I have heard of the book, of course but have never given it a go. I'll put that one on my reading list

On "criminals" and other classifications in general, point well made. I will read the thread you linked after this post and add any comments of my own as necessary (if only to avoid going off on tangents, as I am so wont to do!) It does seem that in treating each person as an individual in their own right, a higher ideal is present. I suppose if this were ever really to happen, the fabric of society as we know if would be ripped to shreds. The marketing firms would certainly go bankrupt, for sure.

And something you wrote:

"Christ-like love of every individual erases such dualistic judgements (good guy/bad guy) from our minds and hearts, and does not allow us to see people as "criminalS". This is an EXTREMELY difficult state of mind to achieve -- probably the most difficult goal in the entire Uni-verse to attain -- but I think it's the proper direction for us to move in, mentally, emotionally, and Spiritually."

The inner fiber of my being yearns to cry "YES!!!" to the above. If in a different frame of mind than the one I am currently in, I would leave it at that. However, I MUST share with you (something I cannot do here at the moment; it is a separate, yet related thread) a most horrifically disturbing scenario which strikes a most challenging chord to the contrary. I need to get into it further but to do so would take at least another hour, so I will go down that path in the not so distant future. If I for some reason forget to address this topic, if you would be so kind as to remind me later on.........

"Correct thinking produces correct action."

Yes, this is a beautiful and simple thought. But what is to be considered correct? In seeking to erase the dualistic judgements of "good" and "bad", then what is left to be thought of as correct? I am not asking this in an attempt to create some sort of loophole. It is a question that plagues me to no end! I regularly conduct such dialogues in my own head (creating in my own mind opposing sides which take turns both asking and answering questions). And to think that the sign of Libra is present in only one element of my natal chart!!!

posted September 24, 2004 02:54 AM              

Want to chime in with 26 and say that I think you're a great Moderator, too! I hope I haven't caused you any, erm, troubles...

As for order and chaos as illustrated by mathematics, I'm quite the "pseudo-novice", myself, so I'm afraid I can't elaborate much. What I posted was simply the end result of the "experts'" mathematical researches. I couldn't even point you to an article, and at the moment I'm not in the mood to go hunting for one... but I just might do that the next time I'm up to it.

But think about it: a lot of things work equally well in both directions. I think there's an odd circularity to Life, that I can kind of explain as infinity = 0. I can't write out a set of equations to prove it; it's an instinctive understanding for me. I was thinking about "infinity" one night, and that thought struck me, and for some reason it won't go away. So I think it's a Truth begging to be noticed. Those are the only two numerical quantities that can't be measured: Everything (infinity) and Nothing (zero). They have that in common -- and who knows what else besides? I'm no mathematician -- so maybe they're the same thing?? Another odd concept that bounces around in my head: the atoms of which we (and all things) are made kind of resemble the bodies in space. I see a similarity between the electrons whirling around an atomic nucleus and planets whirling around a star. Maybe our solar system is just an atom of something insanely larger? And maybe the atoms inside us are solar systems to beings much, much smaller? I think if there's any truth to it at all, it extends infinitely in both directions. And probably eventually loops back on itself somehow, the largest level leading ahead... to the smallest. Infinity equals zero. That whole astronomical bit may be a silly idea, if taken literally, but something in that similarity calls to me, like another Truth wanting to be known.

As for the term "metaphysicians". I simply meant those of us who are interested in the realities beyond the physical. ("Meta" = "beyond") Those of us who deal in abstract philisophical concepts, the meaning of life, Karma, astrology, reincarnation, psychic ability, etc. etc.. So yes, I am one. So are you.

I can't WAIT to hear about the "horrifically disturbing scenario which strikes a most challenging chord to the contrary" of my statement about Christ-like love! You've got me intrigued!

Of the Buddhist statement about 'correct action', you asked: "But what is to be considered correct? In seeking to erase the dualistic judgements of 'good' and 'bad', then what is left to be thought of as correct?" Don't need to apologize or make disclaimers for this question; it's a damned good one! Robert Pirsig drove himself mad (literally) with this question, which in essence is, "What is Quality?" (Ever read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance?) What makes one thing preferable to another? And for sure, what is "good" and what is not changes from situation to situation. It requires awareness to know what is "good" in any particualr circumstance. I think "fitting" is a better word here than "good". If you are aware, you can make a fitting response to your environment as it exists in the present moment. I forget where I read this, but I like it, it seems to affirm that there *is* a way of knowing what the "good" or "fitting" or "correct" action is: "You are a precision instrument of God." I think, in terms we Linda fans are familiar with, that refers to the Higher Self. Let your true or Higher S-elf guide you, and it will reveal to you the "correct action."

I look forward to your next post!

posted September 24, 2004 07:39 PM              

And I would also like to say the same for you, by the way! You have a very poignant way of expressing what you believe and it speaks to a lot about who you are as a person... You're a one of a kind !

And now, to Paras. As for troubles, we all cause them from time to time Hey, who's counting anyway! Definitely not me! I really enjoy our exchange of ideas and I appreciate what you contribute to this forum. Of course, I am not sure I agree with every single idea that you may have but I can't say that I agree with every single idea that anyone else I know has either. So it's a wash Mostly, I just like the fact that you have such an easy manner about you. (Ok, well maybe not when in a heated argument with, let's say, jwhop but I'm not counting that! :laughing

You seem to have an understanding of what true exchange of ideas is all about and you seem genuinely interested in what I have had to say (and ask, as well). That is a great gift, you know; the gift of being truly "present" in a conversation. Thank you!

Quote:
_________________________________________
Maybe our solar system is just an atom of something insanely larger? And maybe the atoms inside us are solar systems to beings much, much smaller?
_________________________________________

Whoa! Why did I never think of this before? It's a COOL concept! And the common thread you pointed out between infinity and 0 (that they are both immeasurable) is also something I never thought of.....

Oh, and ok - about the metaphysicians... I gotcha. I didn't realize you were using it as a mutually collective term. Thought you were just referring to yourself or some kind of "group" that you belong to. Sorry about that. (Me assuming the group thing). But actually, I do find these little groups, especially the "secret" sort to be kind of cool. Very mysterious, intriguing... dangerous almost, in a way. In a tantalizing way. Well, there I went again, floating off into my little world of fantasy thinking up all sorts of secret group scenarios.... Just in case you weren't aware, I tend to very much overdramatacize certain things in my head, whether it be ideas, people, expectations, etc. Then, when the "real" thing turns out to be much less complicated or grandiose, I always feel the sting of disappointment. Ah well.

Hey, guess what? I just picked up that book you were talking about "A Wrinkle In Time", from the bookstore today. Haven't started reading it but I am anticipating!!
And I did hear of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". Of course, it's another one I haven't read yet! (So many books, so little time! Well, seemingly, anyway).....

Quote:
_______________________________________
Let your true or Higher S-elf guide you, and it will reveal to you the "correct action."
_______________________________________

Okay. This is a more individual directive. This is something I have a better grasp on understanding. So, what one might imply from the above is that maybe there is correct and incorrect as it pertains to the individual but not the mass? Hmmmm... Not a new idea but a new way of phrasing it that is making me think differently about it.... Of course, what if not is in a position to know what is correct and not correct? Then, it is sometimes left for others to decide. Is it "correct" to decide for someone other than yourself? I guess, in some cases it must be correct. But then we come to the really difficult situations, like what to do with someone who has committed a murder....
And this brings me to the "disturbing scenario" that I brought up but did not get into..... To summarize, I would have to talk/write to you in a place other than this forum b/c I think it is too disturbing to really post in detail for all to read. I am just not sure it would be a good idea. Of course, if anyone else besides you is curious to know, I would most certainly share but it is something that I do not want to force on any unwitting reader who may happen upon this thread. Perhaps I can write to your email address? But how can you give that to me without posting publicly (assuming you do not want your email address publicly displayed)? Please let me know and I will elaborate further as soon as I can....

posted October 04, 2004 05:37 PM              

My sincerest apologies for not writing you back. I'm having a difficult moment, especially today, and it's hard for me to concentrate or focus on much of anything, let alone communicate effectively.

I'll give you the seed of what would be my response, though, and you can take it from there, yourself, for now:

Imagine that person as a baby.