People as they are Consciously vs. As they are Unconsciously

[Marblehead]

Well no , you couldnt fairly judge someone poorly or well, by even conventional standards , if they arent having any impact , bearing responsibility etc .

But a parent watching their baby being swallowed by a python, and not doing anything about it ,, would be another situation , Yes?

I must first speak to the first sentence, ie, taking responsibility. We do still bear the responsibility for all our thought, words, and actions (or non-actions). It's just that want we think, say, and do effects no one, either positively or negatively.

 

Indeed, the parent must act. The python will be ungrateful, the child will (or at least should) be grateful. Here we have effected one thing negatively and the other positively. No, we wouldn't be able to do nothing in this case.

 

But the decision to have the child in the first place set us up to be judged by others.

[Stosh]

I must first speak to the first sentence, ie, taking responsibility. We do still bear the responsibility for all our thought, words, and actions (or non-actions). It's just that want we think, say, and do effects no one, either positively or negatively.

 

Indeed, the parent must act. The python will be ungrateful, the child will (or at least should) be grateful. Here we have effected one thing negatively and the other positively. No, we wouldn't be able to do nothing in this case.

 

But the decision to have the child in the first place set us up to be judged by others.

Yep , the actions and non-actions ,both, are attributed responsibility , by people on people (including me) ,, which means that one cant be in a state of not- being- blameable , for either their words, actions,or non-actions.

(Unconscious thought is a foggy area though relating to this.)

 

These things responsibility and blame are human conventions , they dont have an external factual veracity,, if you know what I mean,, So I can in fact blame people for anything I want , really, but there would still be the issue of whether the assignment of blame was something which fit the standard thought processes of society.

 

Are you positing that the unconscious person cannot be blamed because it doesnt exist?

 

Id blame the non-interfering parent for the abandonment of their responsibility incurred by having the child in the first place , as I figure you would , its a pretty standard opinion.

 

But no , I cant blame someone-- rightly,, by societal standards of reason and responsibility attribution --, who doesnt in fact exist.

 

The idea of nullifying impacts ,that is , the good to the snake and bad to the baby leading to a zero net "good" is also very subjective.. again suggesting to me that one cannot HAVE a situation of no impact , since I believe there are ramifications to both of the impacting effects that do not cancel.

For instance, one thing was a snake , and the other a baby , so who is it to say, that the good to one matches quantitatively the bad to the other?

 

Are you positing that the unconscious cannot be blamed because it doesnt materially exist?

Edited January 22, 2014 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

Hi Stosh,

 

I have no idea what I am positing. I'm just flowing with the conversation.

 

Nothing in your post jumped out at me. Basic agreement.

 

And I agree, good and bad, praise and blame, are human constructs. In almost all cases these are learned.

 

To this question: Are you positing that the unconscious person cannot be blamed because it doesnt exist?

 

No. However, this must be considered prior to assessing blame.

 

To the other question: Are you positing that the unconscious cannot be blamed because it doesnt materially exist?

 

This is a tricky one. It is true, in my understanding, that our unconscious mind will feed into our conscious mind stuff that is not true and is not good for us if we act on it. To wit, those who have committed crimes against society who claim the God told them to do that whatever.

 

They may honestly believe that God told them to do it. In reality it was their subconscious mind that told them to do it. They are delusional. Is there blame to be placed for this? Or is it something that should be accepted as "what is" and treatment and preventive actions be taken to eliminate the possibility of it ever happening again?

 

[Stosh]

Yes, were in general agreement here once again, I think one can blame him for his delusions.

The question then evolves to ' is there some functional benefit to assigning blame for such a thing

(if nothing is going to be changed in light of the blame) ' ,, just as you said.

 

But besides the direct response of "retaliation" or punishment..

am I not delineating what it is that I think is right for me and everyone else in blaming the other party ?

A friend once wryly paraphrased to me, " Boy! am I glad I felt that way about that guy !"

So assessment of guilt is a somewhat logical process of evaluation drawing lines , molding ones own morality.

And

On the other hand it makes it hard to forgive , either others or oneself , and can justify behaviors

which we ordinarily wouldnt feel were right.

I think Chang suggested something along the lines that one need not be compelled to collect debts, but should keep them tallied

Edited January 22, 2014 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

Yes, blaming is a form of retribution. Getting even, if you will. We do this on both the individual and sociatal level.

 

Yes, knowing that we were right before hand when our fears were supported after the fact. Satisfaction gained.

 

And true, we judge all the time. We even judge other people when the need arises. Sometimes our judgements prove valid and othertime not. Better safe than sorry, I guess.

 

Ah!, forgiveness. I still have one to deal with but the person has not yet asked for forgiveness nor even offered an apology. Makes it hard to forgive.

 

Yep, Chuang Tzu suggested that we don't bother ourself with the debts of others to us. We did what we did and they will do what they do. That's the naturalness of the individuals.

[9th]

So assessment of guilt is a somewhat logical process of evaluation drawing lines , molding ones own morality.

And

On the other hand it makes it hard to forgive , either others or oneself , and can justify behaviors

which we ordinarily wouldnt feel were right.

I think Chang suggested something along the lines that one need not be compelled to collect debts, but should keep them tallied

 

There is a difference between man-made morality, which differs according to culture and geographic location, as well as time period (for instance in some places and times it is morally correct to chop off a thief's hand, to take a woman against her will, etc.) - and the feeling of conscience, which is inborn. Morality belongs to the conditional world of learned response, conscience belongs to the natural function of the human body-mind.

 

In terms of "lawfulness" in regards to actual reality, and therefore cosmic operations - morality is useless while conscience is essential. Conscience is a type of perception derived from heart-based awareness.. and this is not just metaphorical. It is directly related to the physical and subtle functions of the heart and is intimately related to the solar plexus area as well. It is the non-dual aspect of feeling, the mediator and unified field of all emotional manifestations. This is the gateway to accordance with cosmic principle, wu-wei and so forth. It is the means by which alignment to the source of all things is derived and maintained.

 

The (oftentimes great) discrepancy and disconnect between the overarching morality of a given group or society and the universal dictates of conscience is the origin of what has come to be known as "holy madness" or "skillful means" or "crazy wisdom". Such people and actions are considered "crazy" or "mad" from the perspective of society, due to its slavish devotion to (frequently perverse) man-made morals and customs, and its obscuration and repression of conscience and universal (physical, natural) law - which is the source of actual "holiness" and "wisdom". One of the most telling examples for thousands of years has remained as the rampant self-serving materialism which is considered to be the goal of life, and so forth - but in actuality is a harmful disease in terms of the health of our species.

 

Of course morality has often been used as an attempt to bridge the gap between those who may 'see' the necessity of universal accord and those who cannot, giving us Hammurabi's code, and ideas of the "golden rule", and 10 commandments and so forth. Unfortunately such systematic implementation of ideologies do not equate to universal accord itself, and even though this social experiment is long overdue for a efficiency review, the system itself has become a heavily entrenched method for controlling populations, and therefore resources. So its usefulness to the people who profit most from such systems has determined its status as inviolable sanctity.

 

It is not possible to automate conscience or universal accord as in the functionality of a utopia. This requires consciousness, which is also anathema to conditioning in general, and particularly the diseased social mentality which is most prevalent in our day and age and which hinges on self-importance, egoism and so forth.

[Stosh]

para 1 agreed , yes personally most people have some kind of conscience , societally there is also morality.

 

para 2 Ok thats mostly personal view , I have no big issue with it since the ramifications of that difference dont strike me as great

.

para 3 well, 'materialism' (in terms of valuing material goods etc) isnt a disease , its an attempt to bring the internal assessment of the world into balance with the external situation , and to a degree it does work, I too like a nice comfy bed ,good meal, hot shower, etc. Thats why it's popular. It does have a downside though.

 

para 4 The situation is on the doorstep where traditional values will need to be reexamined yes. Population growth , exploration of space , horriffic weapons of mass destruction etc all will come to bear in the next century ,or so I expect.

 

para 5 I dont know what that means.

[silent thunder]

Yes, blaming is a form of retribution. Getting even, if you will. We do this on both the individual and sociatal level.

 

Yes, knowing that we were right before hand when our fears were supported after the fact. Satisfaction gained.

 

And true, we judge all the time. We even judge other people when the need arises. Sometimes our judgements prove valid and othertime not. Better safe than sorry, I guess.

 

Ah!, forgiveness. I still have one to deal with but the person has not yet asked for forgiveness nor even offered an apology. Makes it hard to forgive.

 

Yep, Chuang Tzu suggested that we don't bother ourself with the debts of others to us. We did what we did and they will do what they do. That's the naturalness of the individuals.

I really like what Chuang Tzu says here... it resonates with my recent (last two years) experience with forgiveness.

In the end, with any interaction we feel slighted by, or injured by, it's up to us to let it go. No one else can make it right.

 

I've come to a 180 degree shift in my experience of forgiveness. I find it has near to nothing to do with the person/behavior/issue any longer. It's about letting go of the story in my mind that I replay about the event and then feast on the injustice/resentment emotionally. Even in the face of an apology, there were times I would not forgive, could not, or just plain didn't want to...

 

I was not ready to let go yet. My resentment was about me holding onto the emotions of that event.

Forgiveness was about letting go of my attachment to the process of replaying that memory/story.

 

When I let go and forgive, if it's a person's behavior I'm forgiving, there is no need for me to come to some justification, understanding, liking or approval in my mind over the issue. They are who they are and they did what they did. Much like the conditions of nature.

 

 

The act is entirely internal and stems from a desire to stop re-experiencing the story and feeding that energy system.

Edited January 22, 2014 by silent thunder

[Marblehead]

Great post Silent Thunder! True to the bone.

[Stosh]

Yeah , that was nicely expressed.. thats a thread-ender.

[Marblehead]

No! Can't end the thread. I want to talk about peole being bad some more. Consciously living out their subconscious? Or maybe some are consciousl bad?

[Stosh]

Waking the dead is often considered bad.

[Marblehead]

I have had a few ladies call me bad before.

[Stosh]

There is a difference between man-made morality, which differs according to culture and geographic location, as well as time period (for instance in some places and times it is morally correct to chop off a thief's hand, to take a woman against her will, etc.) - and the feeling of conscience, which is inborn. Morality belongs to the conditional world of learned response, conscience belongs to the natural function of the human body-mind.

 

If you want to we can dig at this,

Are not the conclusions or judgements of ones conscience also learned?

While across cultures it appears that there is conscience , what actually it dictates ,is still at the whim of society and subject only tangentially to the expedience of the situation. Is military service a natural thing to feel duty bound for ? Does one feel guilty for ploughing through a stopsign whether or not anyone else is around? Do not people have secret guilts that most anybody else would say are silly , misguided, self destructive?

Im thinking these things indicate that the 'natural' choices of conscience, like that of 'not stealing' are still learned , its just that living in groups its likely that there would be a taboo about it , (because folks want to keep their own stuff secure).

[Stosh]

I have had a few ladies call me bad before.

Good-bad Im sure. Most likely naughty.

[9th]

There is a difference between man-made morality, which differs according to culture and geographic location, as well as time period (for instance in some places and times it is morally correct to chop off a thief's hand, to take a woman against her will, etc.) - and the feeling of conscience, which is inborn. Morality belongs to the conditional world of learned response, conscience belongs to the natural function of the human body-mind.

 

If you want to we can dig at this,

Are not the conclusions or judgements of ones conscience also learned?

 

Conscience doesnt make conclusions or judgments, it just has feelings. Again, it has nothing to do with legalities or moralities.

 

Granted this is a difficult point for most people, because conscience is deliberately buried by everyone at all times, otherwise the tyranny of the self-image would be impossible - as would hypocrisy. Its a type of conditioning with a very entrenched historical precedent. Everyone learns how to do it from people around them as they are growing up.

[Stosh]

Feelings about what?? decisions behaviors judgements.. not ice cream cones..

[9th]

Feelings about what?? decisions behaviors judgements.. not ice cream cones..

 

Feelings are a type of perception. They can relate to anything and everything.

[Stosh]

Sorry I just dont agree with that. Yes there is free floating anxiety, and yes there is insanity, and yes there are drug induced and hormonally mediated emotional swings.. but anxiety has cause the target of the moment is the variable... , the insane have a rationale all their own though sometimes disjointed.., and drugs or hormones have physical associations which are independent of the origin of conscience (since not everyone who has a conscience is on drugs nor are they all hormonally unbalanced.

If merely some verbal reference to a situation can prick a conscience, then it is a result of a mental association with the subject that prompts the reaction.

One may be informed of their conscience by its "feeling" but the prompt still relies on associations with personal and social rules.

[Marblehead]

Nice post Stosh. I am in agreement, of course.

 

The important thing is to be aware that such conditions exist throughout the human animal world. I don't suggest being paranoid about it but we should be aware. That would help us stay out of a lot of trouble.

[Stosh]

Nice post Stosh. I am in agreement, of course.

 

The important thing is to be aware that such conditions exist throughout the human animal world. I don't suggest being paranoid about it but we should be aware. That would help us stay out of a lot of trouble.

Thanks , me too .. in agreement with you.

[Marblehead]

Thanks , me too .. in agreement with you.

Gee! Now what can we talk about?

[Stosh]

I dunno, the weekends here and Im gonna go to the coast to see what birds are out there, and I have a whole pile of chores Ive let slide BADLY.

[Marblehead]

I dunno, the weekends here and Im gonna go to the coast to see what birds are out there, and I have a whole pile of chores Ive let slide BADLY.

Wierd. I will be doing just the opposite. I will be going to Tallahassee tomorrow to the gun show. Not to buy or even look at guns though. I will be looking at and for perhaps purchase of knives. I started collecting them to add to my sword collection.

[Stosh]

Yep It sounds a bit opposite..but I photo the species for a collection of my own..and so were each setting before ourselves enjoyable tasks that give us things to do hearkening back to a time when the tasks had more serious implications. Im not sure what hobby wouldnt fit that description though. So I guess its just an excuse.