posted November 05, 2007 02:30 PM            

*waving a lovely hand fan to cool myself*

This is what men must feel like when they watch mud wrestling...

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I've never thrown my bra on stage before but I am considering it...

Seriously, I really appreciate this exchange. Great work you two. This is a great gift to me and to others, and I am sure it is also a great gift to both of you.

posted November 05, 2007 02:31 PM              

Free will does offer hope. Free will lifts the spirits to soar to the heights. But mostly, we just can see in our life experiences, in the world and in the lives of others who have overcome so very much how free will and the choices they made is what determined the outcome.

posted November 05, 2007 02:36 PM            

YAY Mirandee, yes, let's hear reasoned arguments from everyone and bless everyone who takes the time to make one and contribute!!!

posted November 05, 2007 02:48 PM              

Now that is only if the parties want to start over.
The other would be to...
1. draw a truce.
2. dispense with hollow forgiveness because there is none without getting to the bottom of things.
3. Shaking hands and forever walking away from each other or at least being civil if avoiding is impossible.

That is for situations where the parties are not going to come to an understanding, and best they wish each other well and part ways.

Kinda like a civilized divorce based on irreconcilable differences.

quote:

---

ir·rec·on·cil·a·ble (-rkn-sl-bl, -rkn-s-)
adj.
Impossible to reconcile: irreconcilable differences.
n.
1. A person, especially a member of a group, who will not compromise, adjust, or submit.
2. One of two or more conflicting ideas or beliefs that cannot be brought into harmony.

---

posted November 05, 2007 02:52 PM            

PRAY.

PRAY.

posted November 05, 2007 05:44 PM              

Keep searching... I always like what you write

posted November 05, 2007 08:30 PM            

quote:

---

If we look around our society at the way it is today with people not taking responsibility and not feeling they should be held accountable for their words and actions, it would appear that the philosophy of Determinism has not served psychology well at all. Nor has it served society well on the level of ethics.

---

"I, for one, do not want to make the mistake of blaming Christianity for what mankind has done to it."
~ Carl Jung

Might we not say the same of Determinism?

--------------------------
--------------------------

I agree, the problem of "responsibility" must be tackled.

But first we need to learn the lesson before us.

As Lia is good enough to remind us,
Wisdom consists partly, if not entirely,
in not going beyond the place where we have yet to arrive.

We need to understand determinism, and then, from there,
we can have a dialogue about the practical implications
for life in the world.
Knowing that we are in the world, not of it,
and learning to live productively according to that understanding.

We need new words.
"Free Will" is misleading, to say the least.
We are not free.
We are involved.
Deeply involved, in our lives,
in the lives of one another,
and in the universe.

We can talk about ways to work practically
within Determinism,
in order to empower people.
We know that power may be increased
(by the grace of God, who works slowly),
and a relative freedom increased with it.

Remembering always,
that we work within a structure,
and arrive where we are by a very specific path;
That no step on THE Path may be skipped.

Rome wasn't built in a day,
and all people are not born equipped,
and/or not equipped by their upbringing,
with the power to make informed, ethical decisions.

The acorn becomes a sappling
long before it becomes a mighty oak.

Immunity is not a birthright.
The symptoms of Temptation,
and the Sickness of Corruption come uninvited.
We must be subject to these, if only to develop resistances
on account of the fact that we are subject to them.

Many times must we grow weak in sin,
before we grow strong in virtues.

The pearl of great price
is not bought with virtues,
but with vices.
An ancient inheritance
and personal savings of sins;
this is what we bring to the Creditor.
In a sense,
God counts our sins as currency,
and converts them into godlike powers.
But these powers are not free.
Our ignorance is the price of our education.

We climb the ladder to Heaven,
and when we get their, we will be as gods,
but, in the meantime,
lets be honest with ourselves: We aren't there yet.
Racism is still alive. And so is the proverbial Devil.

"As the births of living creatures are at first ill-shapen,
so are all innovations, which are the births of time...
But men must know, that in this theatre of man's life,
it is reserved only for God and angels to be lookers on."

- Sir Francis Bacon

We need to climb that ladder, rung by rung,
and, yes, we do need to climb it.

Together.

We need to understand each other,
we need to work with each other,
and not expect others to take responsibility;
not for us, and not even for themselves.
This expectation sows the seeds of disappointment,
and many things far worse than that.

We need to focus a HUGE portion of our attention
on how children are raised and educated.

We could teach "Understanding".

Right between "History" and "Biology".

How's that for an idea?

"As we see, so shall we speak,
and ye receive not out witness."

We can discuss the ethics involved
in taking it upon ourselves to discipline others.

Who are we to judge?

Trials would not decide "guilt" or "innocence",
but, rather,
they would decide how to deal with the situation
so as to create the least pain for everyone concerned.

We need to understand the extent to which
people have differing strengths and weaknesses.
We cant see it in black and white,
with the "crazies" and the "cripples" over there,
and everybody else over here.
Or, a person's thinking, feelings, desires,
choices, will, and actions, are only distorted
if they are depressed or something extreme like that.

The fact is,
subjectivity is at the root of our experience.
Our inidividuality determines our point of view,
coloring and shaping our experience of the world.

We need to listen to one another, and understand;
there is more than just a person and his/her behaviors;
there is in fact an entirely unique perspective on the universe,
almost like an artist's rendering.
Like every person is a work of art.
And there is only One Artist,
and His work is a contraversy to itself.
We enter the world of The Artist,
when we come to know one another.
We are Ideas in the Mind of the Artist,
colliding and/or collaborating.
And, whether we war, or make peace,
the Artist is Inspired.

posted November 05, 2007 09:13 PM            

You passed an unfair judgement of me,
and it provoked a fair judgement in return.

I heard you the first time.
We go on and on, whats the point?
The point is to change the world.
The game is to figure out how.
And if you arent in on the fun,
please, do me a favor and play
in one of the other dozens of sandboxs at LL.
There are plenty of threads full of people who make superficial remarks,
and dont see the point in "going on and on".
They will welcome you with open arms.
And if you feel like playing with us,
you are always welcome.
But if all you have to contribute to this thread
are nihilistic one-liners and naysaying,
why bother? Why not keep it to yourself,
or try to figure out why you think as you do,
and then anti-up a coherent argument like the rest of us.

You want to think that what we are doing is pointless
just because it is something you can't, don't, or won't do.
If you had other reasons, you would have shared them by now.
Instead you want to convince the rest of us that it is pointless too,
with empty rhetoric. Pointless.

I'm not trying to make you feel bad.
I'm trying to tell you the truth.
You probably prayed for this;
to know the truth, even if it hurts.
Not every truth worth knowing hurts,
just most of them.

I have no personal spite against you,
whatever you might think.
I think you often show yourself to be
a very caring and thoughtful person,
who frequently considers other people's views
with a cautious and impartial eye.
There is clearly much to admire in you.

We all want to share love.
I would rather show you love.
But here a situation has arisen,
and it did not inspire love in me.
It inspired the desire to tell the truth.
What kind of false love,
fool's love, blind love,
could I show to you in that moment?
Love means intimacy, and intimacy means honesty.
If I cannot be honest with you,
then I cannot share any connection worth sharing at all.
I would rather respect you enough to tell you the truth,
and trust that you can handle it,
and make something good of it.

Its not about the discomfort your ego feels at this moment,
or the brief shock you received earlier today.
It is about breaking the cocoon of your ego.
Seeing through the veil of self-love.

"Beware,
ye who follow the heart
and leave the head behind."

Love of ourselves blinds us to our own faults,
and makes the shock of learning them a chore
full of "fear and trembling".
We blame others for making us aware of
the injustices we are imposing on them,
on account of our blindness.
We are indeed victims,
but we are victims of our own blindness,
not victims of others.

Likewise, love of our neighbors blinds us to their faults,
and we are shocked, and frequently crushed, to learn these.
We blame our fellows for their character,
and for characteristics we might have seen long ago,
had not love blinded us and made unwitting victims of us.

Does this not prove that love is sometimes a virtue,
and other times a vice?

And that one must learn not merely to love,
but to love skillfully?

Love is a cruel teacher of wisdom,
if she is not tempered by discretion.

Love void of discretion
may be as cruel a teacher
as discretion void of love.

Let love temper discretion,
and discretion temper love.

posted November 05, 2007 11:04 PM            

quote:

---

Love of ourselves blinds us to our own faults

---

posted November 06, 2007 12:14 AM              

quote:

---

Am I not painstakingly and thoroughly
answering all of your questions,
round after round after round?

---

hsc, thank you for replying to my post from page 13.....i'm not sure you would have if i had not said something.....
i'm considering my reply but am quite busy too....

zanya, thank you for bringing up the kybalion....surely you must have read this....it is very much in line with my thinking on the subject.....
i believe in a constrained free will, with the more freedom coming from the ability to focus the mind closer and closer to the here and NOW....

quote:

---

We do not wish to enter into a consideration of Free Will, or Determinism, in this work, for various reasons. Among the many reasons, is the principal one that neither side of the controversy is entirely right-in fact, both sides are partially right, according to the Hermetic Teachings. The Principle of Polarity shows that both are but Half-Truths the opposing poles of Truth. The Teachings are that a man may be both Free and yet bound by Necessity, depending upon the meaning of the terms, and the height of Truth from which the matter is examined. The ancient writers express the matter thus: "The further the creation is from the Centre, the more it is bound; the nearer the Centre it reaches, the nearer Free is it."

The majority of people are more or less the slaves of heredity, environment, etc., and manifest very little Freedom. They are swayed by the opinions, customs and thoughts of the outside world, and also by their emotions, feelings, moods, etc. They manifest no Mastery, worthy of the name. They indignantly repudiate this assertion, saying, "Why, I certainly am free to act and do as I please--I do just what I want to do," but they fail to explain whence arise the "want to" and "as I please." What makes them "want to" do one thing in preference to another; what makes them "please" to do this, and not do that? Is there no "because" to their "pleasing" and "Wanting"? The Master can change these "pleases" and "wants" into others at the opposite end of the mental pole. He is able to "Will to will," instead of to will because some feeling, mood, emotion, or environmental suggestion arouses a tendency or desire within him so to do.

The majority of people are carried along like the falling stone, obedient to environment, outside influences and internal moods, desires, etc., not to speak of the desires and wills of others stronger than themselves, heredity, environment, and suggestion, carrying them along without resistance on their part, or the exercise of the Will. Moved like the pawns on the checkerboard of life, they play their parts and are laid aside after the game is over. But the Masters, knowing the rules of the game, rise above the plane of material life, and placing themselves in touch with the higher powers of their nature, dominate their own moods, characters, qualities, and polarity, as well as the environment surrounding them and thus become Movers in the game, instead of Pawns-Causes instead of Effects. The Masters do not escape the Causation of the higher planes, but fall in with the higher laws, and thus master circumstances on the lower plane. They thus form a conscious part of the Law, instead of being mere blind instruments. While they Serve on the Higher Planes, they Rule on the Material Plane.~~the Kybalion

---

posted November 06, 2007 12:25 AM              

thank you...you are one of the most intelligent , creative and compassionate of persons on this site...., and with a great sense of humor too!!

if i were hsc, i'd be on my knees begging you to marry me :P

posted November 06, 2007 01:19 AM              

quote:

---

We can talk about ways to work practically
within Determinism,
in order to empower people.

---

Okay, HSC, lets begin there. I, and others, have stated many times how Free Will empowers people. We have countless examples of what people have become and done with their lives under the most seemingly hopeless and horrible circumstances. Their lives changed due to seeing what their options were, understanding those options and making the choices to apply those options to their lives.

Now it's your turn. How does Determinism empower people? That is the question that I would like for you to answer for me. I have stated that free will offers hope. I have also stated that free will can be restricted in many ways by our own inward forces and outside forces.

We all have the capability to be free inwardly. The chains we are enshackled by are mostly fashioned by ourselves. "Truth shall set you free." That is the only real freedom there is. Yet most of humanity chooses to live in chains.

I would like for you to explain why you feel that Determinism is preferable to free will in the sense of empowering humanity. Maybe you can convince me if I can come to see how it helps people and empowers them because I know that free will choices and working in cooperation with God in exercising our free will does empower people. It has empowered me in my life and my growth.

posted November 06, 2007 01:41 AM              

quote:

---

once i read a fine essay about forgiveness...it stated that once we discontinue seeing ourselves as victims, that forgiveness isn't a necessity.

---

Zanya, did the essay that you read suggest that we only see ourselves as victims and that there are no real victims?

What about women abused by the partners who are beaten bloody? What about women and children who are raped? What about people who are murdered? What about people unjustly imprisoned? What about people living in countries who are murdered due to geneocide?

Think of all the evils in the world and the atrocities as a result of those evils and tell me that forgiveness is not necessary because people only see themselves as victims.

Then you will discover how very illogical and unrational the essay you read actually was in light of all those atrocities and evils and the need for forgiveness in the world.

If you believe that essay stated a truth then it does not reflect the compassion you stated you so admire in HSC's explanation of Determinism. Because it sorely lacks compassion for those who are by no fault of their own victims of cirmcumstances beyond their control that they neither invited or chose. Go tell the people in Darfur they only see themselves as victims.

But then maybe I haven't reached that higher level of knowledge and understanding that you speak of that sees there are no real and actual victims in the world and nothing in the actions of others that cause misery, suffering and death to other human beings that warrants forgiveness.

And I hope I never reach that level that so sorely lacks compassion, empathy and love.

posted November 06, 2007 01:51 AM              

which path we choose is largely our decision.

we may not control the waves, but we can sure learn to surf.

posted November 06, 2007 02:01 AM              

sorry. i mentioned that i had read an essay that suggested these things; i found it an interesting angle to ponder. i tried understanding its meaning. did i state anywhere something about considering it truth?

i often peer around the angles of ideas to see where they begin and end. participating in a discussion about them doesn't make me married to them.

that's the thing about philosophers and ideas...they throw us far afield from our comfort zones....

it's the reason they're so hated throughout history, isn't it? why did they murder Socrates? why did he acquiesce with such non-resistance?

posted November 06, 2007 02:22 AM              

quote:

---

once i read a fine essay about forgiveness...it stated that once we discontinue seeing ourselves as victims, that forgiveness isn't a necessity.

perhaps we, as sinners, find comfort and transcendence in the doctrine of forgiveness...but once we move into higher realms, with a view from a different perspective, well, we see our interactions in a different fashion, and understand that forgiveness was a mechanism that helped us along our path, but the need of forgiving changes in light of the new perspective.

---

the essay referenced here appeared in an issue of Psychology Today, written from a Jewish perspective about differing religious doctrines. it was about the perspectives we have concerning ourselves and how we perceive the actions of others towards us. it really wasn't at all about any judgment regarding the stance that there are no such things as victims.

again, i apologize for the distress that this has caused anyone.

posted November 06, 2007 06:13 AM              

quote:

---

Someone said to me yesterday, "not everyone will love you. It's a fact of life some people will and some people won't."

But the more spiritual we are, the more we can embrace all. The more we forgive, the more we understand, the more we try to bring out the best in each other.

I try to see the good in people as much as I can.
This is not naieve.
This is just recognizing the light/ divine spark that is in all. The things that hold people back from their "light" is just a part of the distortion.

---

My leaves had dried up yesterday. When this happens, all it takes is one knock to send the rest falling. That is why I over-reacted.

People can hate me if they wish. They can look down on me if they wish.

But at least I am free (free will )to see the good in them and (try) to love all, no matter what.

posted November 06, 2007 08:23 AM              

quote:

---

You passed an unfair judgement of me,
and it provoked a fair judgement in return

---

Does this sound like I was judging YOU, personally?

quote:

---

You lot just love to go on and on and on!

But what can you prove?

Not a single thing!

---

quote:

---

We all want to share love.
I would rather show you love.
But here a situation has arisen,
and it did not inspire love in me.
It inspired the desire to tell the truth.
What kind of false love,
fool's love, blind love,
could I show to you in that moment?
Love means intimacy, and intimacy means honesty.
If I cannot be honest with you,
then I cannot share any connection worth sharing at all.
I would rather respect you enough to tell you the truth,
and trust that you can handle it,
and make something good of it.

Its not about the discomfort your ego feels at this moment,
or the brief shock you received earlier today.
It is about breaking the cocoon of your ego.
Seeing through the veil of self-love.

"Beware,
ye who follow the heart
and leave the head behind."

Love of ourselves blinds us to our own faults,
and makes the shock of learning them a chore
full of "fear and trembling".
We blame others for making us aware of
the injustices we are imposing on them,
on account of our blindness.
We are indeed victims,
but we are victims of our own blindness,
not victims of others.

Likewise, love of our neighbors blinds us to their faults,
and we are shocked, and frequently crushed, to learn these.
We blame our fellows for their character,
and for characteristics we might have seen long ago,
had not love blinded us and made unwitting victims of us.

Does this not prove that love is sometimes a virtue,
and other times a vice?

And that one must learn not merely to love,
but to love skillfully?

Love is a cruel teacher of wisdom,
if she is not tempered by discretion.

Love void of discretion
may be as cruel a teacher
as discretion void of love.

Let love temper discretion,
and discretion temper love.

---

It's all very well to challenge the ego of others, but what when your own ego is challenged?- and I don't mean you personally- but anybody's. How will we respond? With wisdom or with destructive anger? Let me quote something you wrote in another thread here, regarding anger:

quote:

---

This is not the Love of which I speak, which is Agape.

Sure, conditional love can and must exist alongside anger.
That is the very nature of conditional love.
It has conditions, and those conditions are boundaries,
so that the love they manage to contain is,
in effect, surrounded by anger, or "unlove",
and only exists by virtue of that antipathy toward what is outside the circle.
In other words, conditional love is like a cell.
A cell has a membrane which encases it and keeps it together.
The membrane, in this case, is the antipathy to all that does not meet the conditions.
In this sense, love and hate are two sides of the same coin.
But that is only true of conditional love.
You may say the tiger loves,
but she only loves conditionally.
The tiger has no love for the animal she devours.

The Love of God is something else entirely.

Love and Light,
HSC

---

BlueRoamer,

quote:

---

But does not unconditional love make one accepting of both faults and strengths? Isn't it romantic love that is blind? I believe self love makes one more aware of ones attributes. I believe the love you are speaking of is a narcisstic, "I am perfect," sort of love. Not the sort of love that comes with reverence of god in all things and all things in god.

---