Salvijus

I understand what you're proposing. I'm not dismissing your theory. I just find the theory that "the personality is more fundamental to human conditioning than brain" more compelling for me personally. I can only share my logic and way of thinking of how I arrived at that conclusion. Whether or not that theory makes sense to others is up to them to decide. No harm in contemplating different view points tho. It's just exploration of ideas as far as I'm concerned.

That's what is usually assumed by people. But my own questioning leads me to believe the brain has nothing to do with your values. The brain is an instrument to express your personality. Like the hand doesn't have a personality but is an instrument for personality to be expressed I know 🙏

But you being affected by societies conditioning is becuase you have a personality that is more or less focused outward so focused on the world

I would propose that the brain is responsible for your cognitive functioning. Things like memory, assimilation of information, making links between concepts etc. But it is the personality and conditioning that determines your values/desires/interest and thus the direction of your attention.

I would propose an idea that the same principle that applies to surface desires apply to fundamentals of one's psyche aswell. I would propose that it is not the brain and neurology that determines introvert from extrovert but a personality. And personality is conditioning. And conditioning is a set of beliefs and values. Note that key word "values"

The desire could be unconcious. For example your attention abides somewhere inside naturally without you being concious of what is causing the attention to rest there. And suddenly a hot boyfriend shows up (or some other object of high interest) . Then all your attention goes on that object. Why? Because it is of higher interest. If your attention is inside most of the time than it's because it's a place of higher interest for you. See how it all connects nicely? If something is of no interest to you. You wouldnt even register that object in your awareness.

A suggested view point: you can direct your attention somewhere else only if there is desire to do it first. Desire dictates attention.

Bingo. And why is your attention at one place naturally and not the other? My suggested answer: because you see value in holding your attention there. The conclusion thus follows: Where your interests are there your attention goes.

Well i think that view point crumbles under questioning. At least i don't see any basis to support that view point yet. Also. It's probably your logical deduction, not your experience.

"What is bad art" To follow up on the previous thought. Ego is a bad art because it downlifts your spirit. And so all the manifestions of it: anger, judgement, fear, depression, attachment, lust, slothfulness, greed, disease, war etc. These expression can come through many art mediums/shapes/formats. Anything that puts you down basically.

Nature is very beautiful art indeed

I asked once the same question on the forum and I got an answer that I remember till now even. "art is something that uplifts your spirit"

very nice Dope. "Footprints of god's care"

Well here's a question: 1. Can I hold my attention on something I have no interest in? 2. And why would I pay attention to something if I have no interest or desire to hold my attention there? 3. Or why would I hold my attention on something if I see no value in doing so? In my understanding. The focus of energy/attention goes only to those places that are perceived as valuable/of interest/of benefit. I don't know if I'm missing something here. But so far it looks like solid and perfectly logical position.

Hm

Here's an interesting thought. @Osaid Where desire goes, there attention follows aswell. If one had no desire to serve the ego. That one would have zero attention on the body. Because ego is the identity with the body/belief that the body is "me". So without any desire to serve the ego, attention would be sucked away from the body into infinity (also called samadhi where one zones out of existence for a while in infinity) . And the pain of 50years of sitting he would have no special importance that would require attention. And what you pay no attention to, you don't register its existence even into your awareness. (For example when I used to play video games in cross legged. I wouldn't register the pain/numbness in my legs (and other simptoms associated my body) because I would be so absorbed in gaming.) Just something I was contemplating and wanted to share.

Ok, tcare Have a wonderful day

Amen

Haha. Lol I always imagined myself like this tho:

@bebotalk 🥱 there's no need to be so mean... lol. Nice. I'm happie (happy-pie) for you

Maybe "tired of spiritual gibberish that people speak on the forum" haha But real spirituality is forevermore exhilarating I believe. At least for me. If it's not invigorating, then it's probably fake. And the spirit of truth is absent in that material. After all, truth is the most invigorating thing there is. Your eyes and soul should set on fire upon encounters with different expressions of truth. That's how you know you're on the right track.

Okay it's enough chatting for me. I'm going to sleep. Was nice to participate in this talk:) 👋✌️

Gheesh. Lol. Well... You have to agree with me when I say these are quite gigantic claims. I'm not gonna question if it's true or not tho. But probability wise, it's very very hard to believe imo

Whaaaaaat. Lol what kind of logic bending gymnastics is this I don’t know how you were able to dodge the question so eloquently lol. But let me get this straight. You're claiming you can sit for 50years with absolutely no sense of restlessness or impatience?

@Osaid I want to hear your thoughts on this