Science for the awakened

[Nikolai1]

Hi Karl,

 

I have discovered that it is necessary to develop a principled approach to life and to apply total, rational, rigorous integrity and honesty. That means life is now completely satisfying and full for me. I am home, unified and complete. It was a long, bumpy road but I got there in the end-a bit worn, but that can't be helped. 

I am very happy for you, but let me make one caveat.  I think that when people find wholeness and happiness at last there can come a time when the desire comes to 'spread the word'.  You no longer suffer from your own pain, but you look out at the world, and other people's pain and stupidity can make you sad and regretful.  I think the moment a person becomes happy and whole, they become a teacher also.

 

So life doesn't just stop.  Our heart will have desires that wish to be met, and our minds may confuse this process until the end of our days.   In other words, don't get complacent!

[Nikolai1]

The heart is what steps in when the world stops making sense.

 

This doesn't have to be in the form of a fundamental existential crisis.  The world stops making sense everytime we find ourselves in a dilemma.  A dilemma is when we have to choose between two equal but incompatible alternatives. 

 

To follow the heart we have to stop trying to figure out the best outcome.  In fact to follow the heart is to realise that any outcome is completely dependent on how we feel in our heart.  The intellect is totally demoted, totally stripped of its responsibility.  From the perspective of the heart, the intellect is nothing other than a servant which will do as it is told.

 

No longer do we view ourselves as detectives, trying to discover truth in order to find our peace there. From the heart we see that we are already at peace, and it is reality that we shall shape in order to mirror that.  The intellect is the thing that shapes; no longer an instrument of measurement, it is a tool that we use in order to form our heart's desire.

 

What we desire in our hearts, it is true, is not of our choosing.  But we are more than happy to surrender to what our heart wants.  There is no part of us that does not want the same.  There is nothing left to dissent.  We allow our intellect to shape the heart's desires, and are entirely content with the situation.

[Karl]

Hi Karl,

 

 

I am very happy for you, but let me make one caveat.  I think that when people find wholeness and happiness at last there can come a time when the desire comes to 'spread the word'.  You no longer suffer from your own pain, but you look out at the world, and other people's pain and stupidity can make you sad and regretful.  I think the moment a person becomes happy and whole, they become a teacher also.

 

So life doesn't just stop.  Our heart will have desires that wish to be met, and our minds may confuse this process until the end of our days.   In other words, don't get complacent!

 

Absolutely Nickolai. Although I do not think other people's pain makes one sad and regretful anymore than watching a child learn. Teaching is a great pleasure. As one teaches so does one learn.

[Nikolai1]

Absolutely Nickolai. Although I do not think other people's pain makes one sad and regretful anymore than watching a child learn. Teaching is a great pleasure. As one teaches so does one learn.

Unfortunately the students aren't children, but suffering adults in the prime of life.

[Karl]

The heart is what steps in when the world stops making sense.

 

This doesn't have to be in the form of a fundamental existential crisis.  The world stops making sense everytime we find ourselves in a dilemma.  A dilemma is when we have to choose between two equal but incompatible alternatives. 

 

To follow the heart we have to stop trying to figure out the best outcome.  In fact to follow the heart is to realise that any outcome is completely dependent on how we feel in our heart.  The intellect is totally demoted, totally stripped of its responsibility.  From the perspective of the heart, the intellect is nothing other than a servant which will do as it is told.

 

No longer do we view ourselves as detectives, trying to discover truth in order to find our peace there. From the heart we see that we are already at peace, and it is reality that we shall shape in order to mirror that.  The intellect is the thing that shapes; no longer an instrument of measurement, it is a tool that we use in order to form our heart's desire.

 

What we desire in our hearts, it is true, is not of our choosing.  But we are more than happy to surrender to what our heart wants.  There is no part of us that does not want the same.  There is nothing left to dissent.  We allow our intellect to shape the heart's desires, and are entirely content with the situation.

 

This isn't true. Life is struggle. Grab it.

 

 

[Karl]

Unfortunately the students aren't children, but suffering adults in the prime of life.

 

Use your suffering to grasp life. Don't be a passenger, take the wheel and drive. You are a brief spark, use the time you have as best as you can. Don't seek to insulate-participate.

[ilumairen]

I don't ascribe any label to you other than rational human being. I'm only interested in the philosophy you hold, what were its origins and what its success at achieving happiness.

 

That is your label; my heart is not rational. (It isn't irrational either.)

 

Neither do I decry living in the now, or the value of emotions. I'm saying that we cannot live in the now in the way of an animal, by doing so we effectively ignore our minds and thus the survival mechanism that brings us happiness. We might pretend we can live as animals, but that involves devolving our reason to some other entity and abandoning our minds. Effectively we let someone else do the thinking for us and walk around like zombies staring at the first thing that comes across our path.

 

The idea that this way means one is living as an animal is another construct. And more of 'that thing you do' - which I'm actually starting to find oddly charming.

 

If there was ever such a thing as sin, I believe it is the refusal to use the capacity to reason and to act like mind slaves or animals. We are not and we should not IMO.

 

I don't ascribe to the notion of sin. But if I were to apply it to myself, sin would be the hurt I caused to people around me by unintentionally playing out old patterns created by my thinking mind.

[Karl]

That is your label; my heart is not rational. (It isn't irrational either.)

 

 

 

The idea that this way means one is living as an animal is another construct. And more of 'that thing you do' - which I'm actually starting to find oddly charming.

 

 

 

I don't ascribe to the notion of sin. But if I were to apply it to myself, sin would be the hurt I caused to people around me by unintentionally playing out old patterns created by my thinking mind.

 

Rational animal would be a more accurate definition, but I think human Sounds better. A would say a label is pacifist, communist, intellectual, buddhist etc. More a description of attributes.

 

I don't know how you operate in any great detail, I'm still unsure of your philosophy because much of what you say seems contradictory.

 

I still don't know how your definition of heart ? Neither do I understand how you can be neither rational nor irrational. I can understand that it is possible to be both rational and irrational at times, but to say you are neither, definitely stumps me.

 

When you say 'playing out old patterns' do you subscribe to the subjectivist philosophy that the world is purely a creation of your own consciousness, or did you mean it some other way ?

 

I don't think deliberately hurting people is a good idea at any time, but we are social creatures and must interact as we are doing here. The only sure way not to hurt someone unintentionally is never to interact at all, but then that course of action would hurt friends and family equally. Unless you mean your previous actions were destructive ?

 

Interesting to charming :-) I can live with that.

 

 

[ilumairen]

Hi Karl,

 

 

I am very happy for you, but let me make one caveat.  I think that when people find wholeness and happiness at last there can come a time when the desire comes to 'spread the word'.  You no longer suffer from your own pain, but you look out at the world, and other people's pain and stupidity can make you sad and regretful.  I think the moment a person becomes happy and whole, they become a teacher also.

 

And beyond this, to me, is a place where there is nothing to teach, as I don't know what anyone else may need. The best we can do, imo, is give them the space to find their own way.

 

(And maybe point to the words of those who do know..)

[Nikolai1]

Karl,

 

I've been following your conversation with Des and for me it still boils down to this distinction between rational living (which we can call the head) and following the heart.

 

You said:

 

you need your mind to plan the next pay cheque, next meal and beyond. The success of your planning determines your survival into that future.

This is nothing more than a belief.  It is quite easy to look at our lives and notice that, at a conservative estimate, 99.99999% of our lives are totally unplanned.  I've been awake only an hour and there hve already been a near comstant stream of unplanned, but significant events.

 

Even when we do actively plan, things can turn out very different.  This planning really is not as big a thing as you make it.

 

When we accept this we definitely relax, into the moment.  We go with the flow, literally.  We have a certain trust that we are equipped to meet all that will come our way, by using skills and insights that are radically unique to that moment.  It is not rational, predicate based living.  This moment's axiom is the next moment's fallacy.

 

When we aren't trying to orchestrate our lives, which is all about trying to repeat what has been best about the past in the future, we stop using the intellect as our guide.  It is our heart that steps onto centre-stage.  We do what what we want to do, what inspires love and attention in us.  

 

To begin with, our heart's desires are still quite distant outcomes...like the far off dream of the entrepreneur.  But as we bcome more adept, we find that are very lives reflect our hearts desires more and more.  Our lives become filled with what we love and we feel love.  Living by the heart is now a here and now thing.  Our present moment is loved, and it is enough.

 

I've called this thread the science of the awakened, but the key methodology is trust.  It is trust that our hearts are a reliable guide to universal truths.  It is the trust that by following the heart we will no longer need to feel the sense of lack that is the driving force behind all intellectual search.

[Karl]

And beyond this, to me, is a place where there is nothing to teach, as I don't know what anyone else may need. The best we can do, imo, is give them the space to find their own way.

 

(And maybe point to the words of those who do know..)

 

You can teach skills, but it is more important to educate people on how to educate themselves. This equips them to reject the false; the spell weavers and sorcerers-some of whom unwittingly spread falsehoods believing they are helping.

 

We live in a time when the ability to reason has been largely ignored by state education-some say deliberately. It has made us ever more compliant with the words of politicians and corporations, making it difficult to defend ourselves agains their twisted narratives and fluid definitions. We buy into the lifestyles they skilfully offer, the rewards and compromises.

 

It's got so bad, that many of us, who intuit the falsity of the message are utterly lost in the shifting sands and verbal swamps we are forced to navigate. To wit, many have given up and now look towards the new age religions, or to back woods living in order to escape the exhausting torment that leaves a feeling of powerlessness-as if we are adrift on an ocean with neither sail, oars or map.

 

To abandon ones mind is to acquiesce completelely. It is to say 'I no longer think, for what good does it do'. Others are opting out completely, to live a life away from civilisation where they only interact with nature-but this is simply running away on another level. Both of these options are precisely what an animal does when faced with a threat it does not understand, either to freeze and stare fixedly at the oncoming danger, or to hide.

 

The threat we face is man made, it needs rational minds to find solutions to it. Blanking ones mind or hiding, is to give up. It makes inevitable that which is still only a possibility. The war on minds-on Liberty-is over and not a single shot was fired in defence, because we gave up the one weapon which would have us prevail.

[Karl]

Karl,

 

I've been following your conversation with Des and for me it still boils down to this distinction between rational living (which we can call the head) and following the heart.

 

You said:

 

 

This is nothing more than a belief.  It is quite easy to look at our lives and notice that, at a conservative estimate, 99.99999% of our lives are totally unplanned.  I've been awake only an hour and there hve already been a near comstant stream of unplanned, but significant events.

 

Even when we do actively plan, things can turn out very different.  This planning really is not as big a thing as you make it.

 

When we accept this we definitely relax, into the moment.  We go with the flow, literally.  We have a certain trust that we are equipped to meet all that will come our way, by using skills and insights that are radically unique to that moment.  It is not rational, predicate based living.  This moment's axiom is the next moment's fallacy.

 

When we aren't trying to orchestrate our lives, which is all about trying to repeat what has been best about the past in the future, we stop using the intellect as our guide.  It is our heart that steps onto centre-stage.  We do what what we want to do, what inspires love and attention in us.  

 

To begin with, our heart's desires are still quite distant outcomes...like the far off dream of the entrepreneur.  But as we bcome more adept, we find that are very lives reflect our hearts desires more and more.  Our lives become filled with what we love and we feel love.  Living by the heart is now a here and now thing.  Our present moment is loved, and it is enough.

 

I've called this thread the science of the awakened, but the key methodology is trust.  It is trust that our hearts are a reliable guide to universal truths.  It is the trust that by following the heart we will no longer need to feel the sense of lack that is the driving force behind all intellectual search.

 

Of course Nikolai, we can refuse the reason, to look on a much shorter term, to attempt not to think. I was pointing out that we plan, even when we are at our most irrational. The alcoholic on his final days will still plan how to obtain drink, even a suicidal person will plan the method of their demise.

 

This isn't about decrying the pleasure of the moment, we should live there too if we can. One is not planning relentlessly like some crazy beaver that can't stop building dams-that would be exhausting and fairly unproductive. It is about balancing our long range with our more immediate. It is in the planning and the problem solving that we bring reason the the for, but ultimately we must gain and adhere to the values virtuously in order that we bring ourselves the greatest satisfaction by remaining true to them. When we try and gain values we did not earn-to falsify-then our lives are unhappy shells.

 

Is that true ? I can only answer for myself that it is, I cannot answer for others. All I can say is that evading reality, giving up the mind is a kind of subtle suicide. It is giving up and tuning out-I understand why having felt that way for many years. It is not for me to say that it isn't the better option either, everyone will decide for themselves, but it isn't the only option; that rational thinking, survival in the face of tough problems, over coming and fighting is what I believe life is for.

 

It's been an excellent discussion and I think I understand better than I did what it is you are doing. I cannot condone it, but I see that it is not my place to question its validity. If it works for you then that is sufficient.

[ilumairen]

Hi Karl and Nikolai,

 

In your personal quests (ie the lenses that you see the world through) neither of you saw me. All you saw was what to fight for, and to fight against. I am neither of those things. I am.

 

How I ended up here is my story. It's not all pretty, but I've made the most of it. And I've accepted and loved. I do accept and love. But your words are not who I am, or what I would choose to share.

[Nikolai1]

Hi Karl,

 

All I can say is that evading reality, giving up the mind is a kind of subtle suicide. It is giving up and tuning out-

When we give up the mind it's because it has lost all ability to solve the important questions of life. It is finished, caput.  We have taken the mind to its utmost limits and it can tell us how to live.

 

When this question arises in full consciousness: how should I live?, the question 'why should I live?' is not far behind.  You are absoultely right that it is subtle suicide, in fact, I would not call it subtle.  It is suicide, plain and simple, for it is the end of who you were.

 

There is no going back.  There is no going back to a time when the world made sense.  There is no going back to a time when you seek the same life as the others for the same reasons.  It is a religious turning.

 

As I've argued many times, there are many ways of reaching this place...in fact to approach it with the mind is quite rare as people go.  There are very few people with a truly mortified intellect.  But if you want to stay charitable, try not to view as some kind of cowardly escape.  The person who has reached the end of the intellectual road has got there by asking some uncommonly difficult questions.

[Karl]

Hi Karl,

 

 

When we give up the mind it's because it has lost all ability to solve the important questions of life. It is finished, caput.  We have taken the mind to its utmost limits and it can tell us how to live.

 

When this question arises in full consciousness: how should I live?, the question 'why should I live?' is not far behind.  You are absoultely right that it is subtle suicide, in fact, I would not call it subtle.  It is suicide, plain and simple, for it is the end of who you were.

 

There is no going back.  There is no going back to a time when the world made sense.  There is no going back to a time when you seek the same life as the others for the same reasons.  It is a religious turning.

 

As I've argued many times, there are many ways of reaching this place...in fact to approach it with the mind is quite rare as people go.  There are very few people with a truly mortified intellect.  But if you want to stay charitable, try not to view as some kind of cowardly escape.  The person who has reached the end of the intellectual road has got there by asking some uncommonly difficult questions.

 

I understand it, but I cant endorse it. That's the best I can do. There is no point in trying to talk a committed suicide out of their plans but it won't stop me trying all the same. You have been forthright and have not tried to obscure your aims either unwittingly or by deliberate deviousness so I see you have thought it through. I might question your reasoning processes, but I can't accuse you of having your eyes shut. You clearly know what you are doing, where it leads and why you have committed to it.

[Karl]

Hi Karl and Nikolai,

 

In your personal quests (ie the lenses that you see the world through) neither of you saw me. All you saw was what to fight for, and to fight against. I am neither of those things. I am.

 

How I ended up here is my story. It's not all pretty, but I've made the most of it. And I've accepted and loved. I do accept and love. But your words are not who I am, or what I would choose to share.

 

I find your reasoning conflicted Des and that makes it difficult to understand where you are. If I had to guess I would think you are a Hobbsian nominalist-and of course, only a Hobbsian nominalist would say they weren't because everything is subjective right down to the philosophy :-)

 

What confuses me is that you don't appear to subscribe to the 'might is right' philosophy of Hobbs except in passing when you talked of the 'dog eat dog world' that you believe is the aim of objectivism.

 

I suppose if you are a true subjectivist, then even the label subjectivist is entirely an arbitrary nominalisation anyway ?

 

Are you mystic at all in your approach ? Do you have God or some other dogma which you follow ? I dont see evidence for it, but maybe you are at that odd halfway stage at which a deity/dogma becomes a plausibility over a King. You mentioned Locke and Hobbs so I'm guessing they were influential ?

 

Other than that bit of guessing I'm stumped. I would wish to know where you are philosophically, but I'm struggling.

[Nikolai1]

The expression of our heart is love.  It is a very powerful force, the primal force, the only force.  Gravity, we see, is nothing other than a kind of metaphor for this.  Love is always there - it is a constant and unremitting pulling of the lover for the beloved.

 

When we discover that our need is not the woman, but to love the woman - our love is already fully requited, though we may be separated by time and space.  This is the revelation: our true desire is to give love, not the other way round.  To give love is transcendent and contains both the giving and the taking.

 

And in the real world this is simply irresistable.  We love freely, liberally and expect nothing in return.  No desperate, frantic scenes of love.  We can reveal ourselves simply and naively.  "To love you is my only desire.  Whether you respond is perfectly up to you...I am already satisfied."

 

We do not need outer reality to affirm what is in our hearts.  Our love is its own affirmation and its own truth.  We are relaxed, and the world of time and space has absolutely no choice but to reflect back what we give.

 

The woman will of course, love us back.  But that is immaterial to us!

[Karl]

I do not love unconditionally or those that are undeserving because it would make me a compromiser.

 

I respect my wife, her values and ethics. It is because I have stuck with my own values that her values do not compromise my own (or mine hers). We compliment each others values and so the love is deep and strong. It is the values in others that we love, otherwise love is fickle and shallow because we refuse to stick to our values then we are trying to gain value by an act of self deception.

 

Sometimes we don't know this, we accept the compromise for short term gain, but then things turn sour and our happiness dies.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Karl

[Nikolai1]

Karl - so how do you and your wife's values differ?

[Karl]

Karl - so how do you and your wife's values differ?

 

I didn't compromise my values to marry my wife. She didn't compromise her values to marry me. That doesn't mean we agree on everything, only that we allow each other to remain consistent to our values. To be honest is the hardest thing of all and that is where it must begin.

 

That's not the easiest thing to do, it is somewhat like your own philosophy but turned 180 degrees. In other words I wont compromise no matter what-if that means I go through my life as a bachelor then so be it, that to me is better than the alternative. Indeed this is exactly the approach I took after narrowly avoiding marrying in a compromise arrangement.

 

 

[Nikolai1]

I didn't compromise my values to marry my wife. She didn't compromise her values to marry me. That doesn't mean we agree on everything, only that we allow each other to remain consistent to our values. To be honest is the hardest thing of all and that is where it must begin. That's not the easiest thing to do, it is somewhat like your own philosophy but turned 180 degrees. In other words I wont compromise no matter what-if that means I go through my life as a bachelor then so be it, that to me is better than the alternative. Indeed this is exactly the approach I took after narrowly avoiding marrying in a compromise arrangement.

Firstly, what you call 'value' is the same as what I call 'heart's desires', expressed discursively.  They are givens.  They are 'no matter whats'.  They are the thing that we uphold their own sake, even though we see that others do not.  The fact that you were conscious of your own values, and risked loneliness in order to uphold them, I have no doubt is the recipe for your happy marriage.

 

It takes great courage to follow our heart, and I mean live by our values.  Too often we have been told to ignore our unique values in favour of those commonly held.  Living alone is not a situation we have been taught to value, and so many of us make sure that doesn't happen and compromise ourselves in the process.  All this you know.

 

All I want you to understand is that not all of our values are consciously apprehended.  They can remain largely drowned out by the communal values, perhaps from the cradle to the grave.

 

The crisis point I talk about in this thread comes when we have 'seen through' so many of society's values but have not found any replacements.  This is hugely painful and disorientating.  We have realised our marriage is unhappy, but cannot for the life of us work out why.  The replacements come from listening to our actual heart's desires.

 

Societal values are legion.  We hardly suspect how they pervade our experience.  We may fancy ourselves rugged individualists, but we're not.  And that aren't just ethical values, they are also intellectual, aesthetic...you name it.   As we see through one, we see through legions that are of the same species.  We find the reality that we share with others fall away in huge chucks.  We do not have to take them all one by one.  Our lives became darker and narrower and lonelier and. yes, it is suicide because we are literally killiing ourselves.  We are killing off the source of so much of what we are: the store of shared value.

 

As we learn to identify the true voice of the heart it is unmistakable because it is the only one doing any talking.  We find that some things stay with us - some values we do not renounce.  These are the ones we got right in the first place.  We were never entirely deaf to our heart, and so some things - it could be our marriage, our career, even our love of tennis - but some things don't need to change.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Nikolai1

[Karl]

Firstly, what you call 'value' is the same as what I call 'heart's desires', expressed discursively.  They are givens.  They are 'no matter whats'.  They are the thing that we uphold their own sake, even though we see that others do not.  The fact that you were conscious of your own values, and risked loneliness in order to uphold them, I have no doubt is the recipe for your happy marriage.

 

It takes great courage to follow our heart, and I mean live by our values.  Too often we have been told to ignore our unique values in favour of those commonly held.  Living alone is not a situation we have been taught to value, and so many of us make sure that doesn't happen and compromise ourselves in the process.  All this you know.

 

All I want you to understand is that not all of our values are consciously apprehended.  They can remain largely drowned out by the communal values, perhaps from the cradle to the grave.

 

The crisis point I talk about in this thread comes when we have 'seen through' so many of society's values but have not found any replacements.  This is hugely painful and disorientating.  We have realised our marriage is unhappy, but cannot for the life of us work out why.  The replacements come from listening to our actual heart's desires.

 

Societal values are legion.  We hardly suspect how they pervade our experience.  We may fancy ourselves rugged individualists, but we're not.  And that aren't just ethical values, they are also intellectual, aesthetic...you name it.   As we see through one, we see through legions that are of the same species.  We find the reality that we share with others fall away in huge chucks.  We do not have to take them all one by one.  Our lives became darker and narrower and lonelier and. yes, it is suicide because we are literally killiing ourselves.  We are killing off the source of so much of what we are: the store of shared value.

 

As we learn to identify the true voice of the heart it is unmistakable because it is the only one doing any talking.  We find that some things stay with us - some values we do not renounce.  These are the ones we got right in the first place.  We were never entirely deaf to our heart, and so some things - it could be our marriage, our career, even our love of tennis - but some things don't need to change.

 

You see, what you are saying has a lot of truth in it. That's why I was trying to grasp if your definition for the heart was actually a store of values and not just whim. I already see that this is true for you because your previous reply showed those values and I can't argue with your actions if they are genuinely in line with those values. It is only when it becomes a kind of fanciful whimsy in which values are considered unnecessary or even dangerous that it becomes difficult to even begin a discussion.

 

I think if you look after your values, abide with them, don't be afraid to be uncompromising, then whatever you do will work out for you.

 

You also picked up on societal values, or at least those promoted as being homogenous by those in charge. This is a collectivist fantasy which we are forced to live under. All you can do is maintain your values. Once you give in, once you compromise then you are a slave. Even abdication is compromise and should be recognised for what it is.

[Nikolai1]

Karl

 

That's why I was trying to grasp if your definition for the heart was actually a store of values and not just whim.

We only start talking about the heart when we find ourselves parting company from the herd.  It is that which is not shared in the world of words and concepts.  And from the herd's perspective the direction we are taking looks highly whimsical.  But for you yourself, it is not whim, but rather a mandate that comes from a deeper place than the herd can appreciate.  It is the call of your actual individuality - anathema to all group think.

 

So why we find ourselves following this strange and uncharted course we can never say.  It is the truth that is not recognised by the herd, so we aren't interested in whether it is irrational from their perspective.  

[Karl]

Karl

 

 

We only start talking about the heart when we find ourselves parting company from the herd. It is that which is not shared in the world of words and concepts. And from the herd's perspective the direction we are taking looks highly whimsical. But for you yourself, it is not whim, but rather a mandate that comes from a deeper place than the herd can appreciate. It is the call of your actual individuality - anathema to all group think.

 

So why we find ourselves following this strange and uncharted course we can never say. It is the truth that is not recognised by the herd, so we aren't interested in whether it is irrational from their perspective.

I think any disagreement here is one of philosophic semantics. Where you say values are intrinsically derived from the heart, I see them as conceptual reasoned and derived from sense precepts. We learn what gives us the greatest opportunity for happiness and that is to be rational, have integrity and honesty in all dealings. Our values vary, but we should stick tightly to those virtues regardless of what we are told we should do.

 

However we think they are derived, the important thing is to have and recognise that fact that we have them. I don't think it's necessary to be in one camp or the other as long as we remain true and unerring. That we don't try and knowingly evade compromise, or justify an action we know contradicts our values in order to obtain a value falsely.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Karl

[Nikolai1]

Our values vary, but we should stick tightly to those virtues regardless of what we are told we should do.

 

However we think they are derived, the important thing is to have and recognise that fact that we have them. 

Yes absolutely.  And of course we are all born with certain truly individual values, and we naturally uphold them and they make us unique.

 

The process I am interested in here, is the discovery of those values that have been stamped out by society.  Actually, if they were totally stamped out they wouldn't cause us trouble.  It is the fact they they constantly niggle at us when we are honestly trying to be good dutiful citizens, and make our lives rocky.  They are stamped on, but not killed off, and that makes us suffer.

 

The spiritual life is this process of awakening to who we really are, and what we, and no-one esle, really want.  It is the process of surrounding ourselves with what we love and making our world brighter in the process.  It is hard, a heroic struggle, but when you are called to it you can't say 'no.'

 

I think any disagreement here is one of philosophic semantics. Where you say values are intrinsically derived from the heart, I see them as conceptual reasoned and derived from sense precepts. 

Yes I can see that.  What strikes you as irrational, I call something like inauthentic.  The inauthentic is that which we assume to be true but haven't tested in the crucible of our own heart.  The inauthentic comes when we listen to the herd and not ourselves.

 

I have said here that our heart is infallible as mathematics.