Are my beliefs stage-orange hogwash, or in line with non duality?

[Pharion]

Im looking for the opinion of someone who is advanced in non dualism and spirituality and has the authority to judge this.

So, I got into philosophy and politics around the same time and since then ive delved deep into dozens of hours of theory, books, debates, self reflection etc.

to form my own beliefs about politics, philosophy and morality. 

Here are my essential moral beleifs. 

-Universality. I see an action as good if it would benefit the world for everyone to do it. Put simply, act in a way that does not hinder other people while benefiting you, or the golden rule "treat others as you would be treated" (not exactly the same as universality, but close. 

-Non initiation of force. Coupled with universality, I think any forceful interaction (done by a human) is wrong. Including taxation, including arresting people for drug possession, hate speech etc. and including hitting your children / significant other because they got on your nerves. 

-Voluntarism. People can do what ever they want, voluntarily. I have no problem with communist societies existing as long as every member chose to join it, what im not okay with is mandatory rules being forced on people. Of course if you break a rule people can voluntarily choose to not interact with you or help you, thats fine, and if you hurt someone they can defend themselves from you. 

Philisophically I happiness is basically the ultimate goal of all people. It's hard wired into us, and I don't even think this point is debatable because I would define happiness as "the positive feeling which all other actions are aimed at." I'm not into hedonism. Just because happiness is the ultimate goal, doesn't mean you should blindly and stupidly pursue it right now at the cost of others. Moral principles should be followed with discipline to guide us to long term, sustainable happiness that doesn't rely on harming others. Im serious about my beliefs, I'm fully vegan. I try to always tell the truth, and im successful with that, and I genuinely try to be a good and selfless person. 

I don't think people who violate these principles are evil necessarily, I just see that there are better and worse ways of acting as a human. 

What I want to know  "individualism" is inherently wrong because there are no individuals? or, (given my ignorance) are my values consistent with the higher level truths that I have yet to understand? I'm always willing to change my beliefs when im presented with new evidence, and I'd like to hear from some people. 

If I were to pin my my beleifs on the spiral dynamics stages I guess id say thier smack in the middle of orange and green but I could be wrong.

[Flammable]

Non-duality is the absence of all beliefs. 

[Pharion]

@Flammable I get that, but surely even with enlightenment you must still have a hierarchy of practical beliefs to live in the natural world like, "I need to drink water, it's not a good idea to put my hand in fire" When I say these are my beleifs, I mean merely from a practical perspective. I don't think theres any kind of divine order making voluntarism or certain moral principles objectively, I just think they can benefit society to be more happy and progress further. 

[kieranperez]

Rule of Thumb: If you have a belief, it's hogwash. 

4 minutes ago, Pharion said:

@Flammable I get that, but surely even with enlightenment you must still have a hierarchy of practical beliefs to live in the natural world like, "I need to drink water, it's not a good idea to put my hand in fire" When I say these are my beleifs, I mean merely from a practical perspective. I don't think theres any kind of divine order making voluntarism or certain moral principles objectively, I just think they can benefit society to be more happy and progress further. 

Sure. You'll still have beliefs. However, one of the major goals and requisites in this path is tossing all beliefs because all beliefs are false. Also, after you say awaken to your true nature, you'll be much more open and have greater understanding that no belief is the truth nor is true. You'll take your beliefs much more lightly after an enlightenment experience and you'll understand that you can toss them to.

See this clip with @Leo Gura & Peter Ralston:

 

[Forestluv]

This sounds like some Ayn Rand Orange-level stuff with some Green sprinkled in.

From a logical perspective, it is not even in the same ballpark as nonduality.

 

[Pharion]

@Serotoninluv Isn't non duality supposed to be beyond logic? 

[Forestluv]

19 minutes ago, Pharion said:

@Serotoninluv Isn't non duality supposed to be beyond logic? 

Logic is within nonduality (as is everything).

From a Tier1 perspective, nonduality appears to be beyond logic.

[Pharion]

@Leo Gura maybe this deserves a new topic, but I wonder how Leo, or someone who agrees on his teachings would reconcile the idea that all beliefs are false / irrelevant with the usefulness of a system of beliefs IE the ideas in spiral dynamics. Again, this might be definition issue and I'll re state that my "beliefs" are not moral "shoulds"n the same way that stage blue beliefs are. They are merely obsersveration based general principles aimed with the goal of people not suffering unnecessarily.There is a difference between challenging the truth value of a belief like this, and challenging the idea of the validity of practical beliefs at all. In response to @kieranperez I can definitely see how after an enlightenment experience you may see far less importance in practical beliefs, but nevertheless we still need some kind of values and governmental structure if we wish to function as a society, and surely some methods will be more effective than others? Is this just one of those paradoxes that can't be logically solved?

[Nahm]

“Are my beliefs stage-orange hogwash, or in line with non duality?”

“Im looking for the opinion of someone who is advanced in non dualism and spirituality and has the authority to judge this.”

Beliefs aren’t ‘in’, and questions for others don’t arise ‘in’, nonduality. You are quite literally God. 

The rest of the post is basically ideologies. (Lovely ones though) SD’s is descriptive, not actuality, non-dually speaking. Observation is not ‘in’ nonduality. Values without yes, within, no. There’s no self & society anymore, only Being. 

And of course, all of that is ‘in’ nonduality.

[Forestluv]

9 minutes ago, Nahm said:

“Are my beliefs stage-orange hogwash, or in line with non duality?”

“Im looking for the opinion of someone who is advanced in non dualism and spirituality and has the authority to judge this.”

Beliefs aren’t ‘in’, and questions for others don’t arise ‘in’, nonduality. You are quite literally God. 

The rest of the post is basically ideologies. (Lovely ones though) SD’s is descriptive, not actuality, nonduality speaking. Observation is not ‘in’ nonduality. Values without yes, within, no. There’s no self & society anymore, only Being. 

And of course, all of that is ‘in’ nonduality.

I'd like to write a psychological thriller called "Escape From Nonduality". (spoiler alert: there is no escape).

[Nahm]

@Serotoninluv Nailed it. 

[kieranperez]

The only real reason we “need” these rules is because people don’t want to see, investigate, nor admit why we have these “rules”, values, laws, etc. in the first place. 

We have these because fundamentally people need to be manipulated by other systems and by themselves to do “good” and not cause harm to others. See Leo’s 2 videos on morality. We have rules not kill someone because we are so egotistical, selfish, self-deceived, and unconscious that we actually need a rule or law to not do so. Most people live in a world based around resistance. So what happens when you want to do one thing but you have a rule that says not to? You have tension and repression/suppression. Imagine a world where someone didn’t need a rule to not kill someone, get pissed off, he’ll at someone, etc.

The fact that we have these rules is just a testament to our own lack of development. 

The fact that we have to use government also to enforce these things is also a testament to our own lack of development as a a society. Sure it can maybe be done but this is like you need to go to the grocery store that’s a 5 minute drive away but instead you get in your car and drive the opposite direction taking long detours and routes ends up taking 6 hours and by the time you get there the store is closed. 

But hey, maybe that’s the way we have to do it. 

[Pharion]

@Serotoninluv Lol!

[Pharion]

@kieranperez yeah those are some really good insights. I think societies move way way slower than individuals generally, so for me personally it's not like im forcing or reminding myself to be a good person and follow my principles, I just want to be and it comes naturally to do those things. Society is a different beast, you can only really influence it bit by bit to evolve, like Leo and us as a community are doing with Actualised.org, maybe we'll have a 0.5% influence on society to grow just a little bit, and that would be a big success! 

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

-Universality. I see an action as good if it would benefit the world for everyone to do it. Put simply, act in a way that does not hinder other people while benefiting you, or the golden rule "treat others as you would be treated" (not exactly the same as universality, but close. 

-Non initiation of force. Coupled with universality, I think any forceful interaction (done by a human) is wrong. Including taxation, including arresting people for drug possession, hate speech etc. and including hitting your children / significant other because they got on your nerves. 

-Voluntarism. People can do what ever they want, voluntarily. I have no problem with communist societies existing as long as every member chose to join it, what im not okay with is mandatory rules being forced on people. Of course if you break a rule people can voluntarily choose to not interact with you or help you, thats fine, and if you hurt someone they can defend themselves from you. 

Philisophically I happiness is basically the ultimate goal of all people. It's hard wired into us, and I don't even think this point is debatable because I would define happiness as "the positive feeling which all other actions are aimed at." I'm not into hedonism. Just because happiness is the ultimate goal, doesn't mean you should blindly and stupidly pursue it right now at the cost of others. Moral principles should be followed with discipline to guide us to long term, sustainable happiness that doesn't rely on harming others. Im serious about my beliefs, I'm fully vegan. I try to always tell the truth, and im successful with that, and I genuinely try to be a good and selfless person. 

All of this is relative and contingent. That's YOUR point of view. Don't expect others to agree with that, and don't expect that to be some eternal, objective truth.

Right and wrong are constructs of your ego-mind. If you stop thinking a thing is wrong, it will stop being wrong.

People will use force regardless of what you believe is right or wrong. People do whatever they want, period. That is always the case. You are free to do whatever you are physically capable of doing.

All shoulds are delusion. There are no shoulds in the universe. Whatever is the case, is what is.

The ultimate goal for most people is not happiness but survival. Which is why most people are not happy.

Your beliefs are mostly dualistic. The opposite of nonduality. It would be wise to question and deconstruct them.

[SOUL]

3 hours ago, Flammable said:

Non-duality is the absence of all beliefs.

This is a belief.

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

Universality

Diversity is universality.

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

Non initiation of force

How would you enforce this policy of non-initiation of force on a society?

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

Voluntarism

What if someone doesn't want to comply with volunteerism and wants to compel or coerce others, how would you stop them?

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

happiness is basically the ultimate goal of all people

This is debatable.

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

non dualism and spirituality and has the authority to judge this

There is no authority to judge 'non-dualism' and 'spirituality'.

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

to form my own beliefs about politics, philosophy and morality. 

Seems more like you just adopted other people's ideas from videos, books and debates and didn't form your own.

3 hours ago, Pharion said:

I got into philosophy and politics around the same time and since then ive delved deep

Keep delving because this 'libertarian utopia' ideology you've adopted from others is problematic and unrealistic.

[Mafortu]

Like everyone else is saying, what is "right" and what is "wrong" are just silly ideas made up by men. Would any of your statements hold true if you were a manta-ray living in the ocean?

[Nahm]

Wait...”Hogwash”? 

Nice.

[Annoynymous]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

All of this is relative and contingent. That's YOUR point of view. Don't expect others to agree with that, and don't expect that to be some eternal, objective truth.

Right and wrong are constructs of your ego-mind. If you stop thinking a thing is wrong, it will stop being wrong.

People will use force regardless of what you believe is right or wrong. People do whatever they want, period. That is always the case. You are free to do whatever you are physically capable of doing.

All shoulds are delusion. There are no shoulds in the universe. Whatever is the case, is what is.

The ultimate goal for most people is not happiness but survival. Which is why most people are not happy.

Your beliefs are mostly dualistic. The opposite of nonduality. It would be wise to question and deconstruct them.

@Leo Gura so how do we basically interact with people? If there is no should then one can even kill me just because i shared my POV with them. How to deal with people then?

[FoxFoxFox]

10 hours ago, Pharion said:

@Flammable I get that, but surely even with enlightenment you must still have a hierarchy of practical beliefs to live in the natural world like, "I need to drink water, it's not a good idea to put my hand in fire" When I say these are my beleifs, I mean merely from a practical perspective. I don't think theres any kind of divine order making voluntarism or certain moral principles objectively, I just think they can benefit society to be more happy and progress further. 

Beliefs, and an "I" who drives the body is not necessary for the body to survive. As much as it might seem to not be the case, you - the ego - are in fact not in control of the body. To demonstrate that, the next time a thought arises, separate the object of the thought from it's subject - the "I" thought. For example, the next time you have the thought "I am hungry." separate the "hunger" thought-form from the "I am" thought-form". Doing this immediately dismantles the "hunger" thought, because you realize that it's just a name for an appearance in reality, and it by itself has no substance. Mind you, the point is not to get rid of the sensation of the hunger, do not be trapped in that paradigm. Hold on to the "I" thought for a while and see if you can find its source. The answer is that itself being a thought, is also insubstantial. Once you are able to let go of that thought, the division between "I" and the rest of the world breakdown, because all other thoughts are dependent upon the "I thought-form" to exist (if there is no concept of an I, then there can be no concept of a you). At that moment, you will see that the body moves about taking care of its own business by the unfathomable grace of the Self, without a need for an illusory driver. 

Edited November 20, 2018 by FoxFoxFox