Friends Who Don't Understand Actualization?

[Mal]

5 hours ago, charlie2dogs said:

if all crimes against humans are looked at this way it will only contribute to the degeneration of the civilization.  when consequences are created, it should be seen as consequences, not dressed up to look like something else.

As a being of consciousness who cannot look into the future (because there is no future, yes?) how do you know this will be the case?

Unless, you are speaking as the human identity at this point, therefore you are shrouded in beliefs and "unable to see reality"?

And, do you know for sure that conformist labelling of criminals AS criminals who create consequences (despite the fact they are not conscious and have no free will but are programmed) and not human beings with problems (which is what empathy is) will keep civilization in tact?

I'm looking forward to your reply (IF you are willing to debate with this "ego" here!)

Mal

 

Edited June 9, 2016 by Mal

[charlie2dogs]

2 hours ago, Mal said:

 

Charlie, it looks to me as if you are not actually interested in seeing reality.

Misanthropy or just woeful editing, perhaps?

Respectfully

-Mal

 

2 hours ago, Mal said:

 

 

Charlie, 

I'm missing something.

Can you explain the incongruity in your statements, please?  If there is no free will, then the criminal is not personally culpable and is indeed part of a larger social problem.  

And nobody mentioned (until you did) that a criminal should not be punished or restrained,  we are talking about the phenomena of empathy for all parties involved.

Mal

 

3 hours ago, Mal said:

 

Charlie, it looks to me as if you are not actually interested in seeing reality.

Misanthropy or just woeful editing, perhaps?

Respectfully

-Mal

seems you didnt get the point either.

[charlie2dogs]

1 minute ago, charlie2dogs said:

 

 

seems you didnt get the point either.

and just because you are programed and have a false belief system doesnt remove you from responsibility or do away with the quantum memory of your actions.

[Mal]

8 hours ago, charlie2dogs said:

Having said that we are here in this physical world, that requires some measure of responsibility for your actions and some have to be restrained and even punished for what they do and  when humans commit horrible crimes against other humans such as the rape of women and children and worse,  it should not be looked at as moralizing  when it is spoken of.   so far in all the text here no one has voiced any thing about the real victim, the one that was raped and the trauma and possibly the lasting effects of that on that person, , but rather its about the rapist being the victim of society instead and how we should not be moralizing the rapist.   

Charlie, 

Thanks for your reply.  

I'm still unsure of who you were replying to with the following statements: 

You said: " no one has voiced any thing about the real victim, the one that was raped and the trauma"

This is not true, because I did in fact mention that the "victim" of a rape is a victim.  However, I also said that the perpetrator of the rape is also a victim from a highly emotionally developed persons perspective.

You said: "but rather its about the rapist being the victim of society instead and how we should not be moralizing the rapist"

Again, this is another distortion. Nobody here has sided with the rapist as a victim INSTEAD of focusing on the victim of the crime.  I cannot see any part of the texts you were referring to when you made these two statements.

8 hours ago, charlie2dogs said:

if all crimes against humans are looked at this way it will only contribute to the degeneration of the civilization.  when consequences are created, it should be seen as consequences, not dressed up to look like something else.

Nobody in this discussion made the claim that people who commit crimes should not be treated as if they have done nothing wrong.  This is another strawman.

4 hours ago, charlie2dogs said:

this thing about free will, it has never existed and wont exist for this world.  Anyone who has been programed all their life and longer and have formed a belief system,  is not exercising free will, any choices made by them are made by the programing and belief. the human identity has never seen nor touched reality, so how can the human identity exercise free will.

Do self-realized beings who are in touch with reality create strawman arguments?

What you have done here is verbally attacked your own reflection.  This is a trait of a conformist who holds fixed beliefs about specific issues.  The process of introjection of beliefs and the outward projecting.  There is no reality processing here, just a game of hide and seek with ones own projected shadow.

 

Edited June 9, 2016 by Mal

[Ajax]

On 6/7/2016 at 3:52 PM, BeckoningCat said:

It has come to my attention lately in my close friendships that people seem to simply not understand actualization.

Many of Leo's recent videos have helped me understand how terrible I was with moralizing the world and now I want to change that. Yet some of the people closest to me seem the most offended by this personal shift. I have been trying to look at these differences through a very open, non-judgemental lens. I do not judge her for how she reacted, but I do wonder what the future of these types of relationships will be? What are your experiences with people like this and what did you realize about them? Did you have any insights that helped? 

Realize that this issue affects everyone not just those uninitiated to personal development.  I would like to invite you to review the following thread, and a certain member who decided to"attack"  "me".

You see, even if you say a moral neutral statement, people will get upset that you did not condemn it and even assume that you are the "enemy" or support it... it's dualistic thinking which inhibits even the sages. So really you should be ready to expect such a response from any controversial topic that you discuss. It is what SHOULD happen lol!

Edited June 9, 2016 by Ajax

[charlie2dogs]

27 minutes ago, Mal said:

Charlie, 

Thanks for your reply.  

I'm still unsure of who you were replying to with the following statements: 

You said: " no one has voiced any thing about the real victim, the one that was raped and the trauma"

This is not true, because I did in fact mention that the "victim" of a rape is a victim.  However, I also said that the perpetrator of the rape is also a victim from a highly emotionally developed persons perspective.

You said: "but rather its about the rapist being the victim of society instead and how we should not be moralizing the rapist"

Again, this is another distortion. Nobody here has sided with the rapist as a victim INSTEAD of focusing on the victim of the crime.  I cannot see any part of the texts you were referring to when you made these two statements.

Nobody in this discussion made the claim that people who commit crimes should not be treated as if they have done nothing wrong.  This is another strawman.

Do self-realized beings who are in touch with reality create strawman arguments?

What you have done here is verbally attacked your own reflection.  This is a trait of a conformist who holds fixed beliefs about specific issues.  The process of introjection of beliefs and the outward projecting.  There is no reality processing here, just a game of hide and seek with ones own projected shadow.

 

thats your opinion,

[charlie2dogs]

10 minutes ago, charlie2dogs said:

thats your opinion,

i only had one point to make on this topic, i made it i clarified it, and only one person even tried to grasp what i was talking about. enough said.

[Mal]

14 minutes ago, charlie2dogs said:

thats your opinion,

It's my opinion that you have created strawman and then attacked them?

Or is it my opinion that this is the behaviour of a specific level of ego development called conformist?

Because I can produce the research results for you if you like.  However, I don't need research as I have my own eyes and they are working very well.  

Edited June 9, 2016 by Mal

[charlie2dogs]

21 minutes ago, Ajax said:

Realize that this issue affects everyone not just those uninitiated to personal development.  I would like to invite you to review the following thread, and a certain member who decided to"attack"  "me".

You see, even if you say a moral neutral statement, people will get upset that you did not condemn it and even assume that you are the "enemy" or support it... it's dualistic thinking which inhibits even the sages. So really you should be ready to expect such a response from any controversial topic that you discuss. It is what SHOULD happen lol!

well ajax you were right about the breatharian movement, most have never heard of it.

[Mal]

38 minutes ago, charlie2dogs said:

i only had one point to make on this topic, i made it i clarified it, and only one person even tried to grasp what i was talking about. enough said.

I just saw this comment.

It's not a rare occurrence for a human being to get something 100% completely wrong.  Alas your behaviour on this column of text is another example of how a person can and does project the contents of their own mind onto the conversational landscape.

The only person who wasn't aware of the conversation and who did try to push a point was yourself.  You won't be aware of this but it was actually you who failed to grasp what the other participants were attempting to say to you.

You will not understand what is being said to you, as you have your own agenda and "points" to get people to "grasp".  

Higher levels of development are shrouded in mystery when viewed from the lower rungs of the ladder as the progression of development is a movement of transcending the current stage of development and including and organizing the content that came before it.

You missed the essence of the conversation by pushing your strawman and personal agenda.  This is not your fault, but you have unwittingly demonstrated how a self-realized person can still, sadly, be run by their ego without knowing it.

Mal

Edited June 9, 2016 by Mal

[Ajax]

On 6/8/2016 at 6:20 PM, charlie2dogs said:

i never heard you address the issue of rape that she raised, why not?  recognizing a crime against women and children is not moralizing.  Should we just ignore it and pretend it doesnt exist, or that we are untouched by it,  should we just reject people who are concerned about rape of women and children because we are self actualizing?  Do you think anything should be done with people who rape women and children. 

you said: I said that I did not want to moralize it and was trying to look at it from a neutral perspective,  what is there to be neutral about after some woman or young girl was raped.  She had every right to be upset with you.  Just because people are trying to self actualize doesnt mean you stop being  compassionate, caring, and lose all sight of how horrible rape is against women and children and the effects that it leaves on them often for their lifetime.  If everyone felt neutral about every crime and no one wanted to do anything about it, what would the world look like in a few years.  There is no way to be neutral about such crimes as this or any other crime against humans or animals.  This has nothing to do with self actualization.  being neutral concerning crimes like this wont help you become self realized,

 

I do see what you are saying and I do agree with you. It is a danger to start moralizing  the "moralizing"... And yes, you are right that is what he seems to have been doing. I am sure he feels compassion for the woman/child who was hurt... and yes he should have been more mindful of making it clear that he does not approve of such actions and that they are harmful and barbaric to society. And yes, it was not the time or place to discuss the issue of neutrality with her so in that way he contributed to the outburst... however, I see what he was trying to do and it wasn't necessarily wrong what he did because he was practicing a very powerful self development concept, however at the same time you are right because she did have every right to get upset.

 

I think what most of us students are trying to do is to handle the problem of criminality. This issue affects everyone, hell my human identity kicks in around strange children because I am afraid of being labeled a pedophile just because I am a man. Because of criminality people have difficulty trusting and even loving their neighbor. That is why us students want to solve the problem... and to many of the students, think that de-moralizing is one of the first steps.  As, they try to understand the criminal mentality they understand that the criminality is in great part due to the victim mentality... therefore punishment does not seem to be a viable option because it makes them feel further victimized and possible more dangerous... but the problem we still don't quite know how to solve the issue so we moralize it by avoiding moralizing.

@Mal You are right on many points but you are also moralizing... moralizing is being prejudicial. Being prejudicial means "anything adverse to something without sufficient knowledge." As an observer I can tell you are not fully understanding his viewpoint so you do not have sufficient knowledge.

[Mal]

@Ajax I am merely stating what healthy self development looks like from a 1st person perspective.  I have been embedded in this post-convetional construct myself. 

It's very important to pass through these stages toward increasing wholeness and avoid aborting emotional development in favour of self-realization. 

If you read my other posts you will understand that I have no moral issues.  I let all systems be as they are.  You are not grasping the context and subtlety of what I'm doing on this forum. 

What I do have a problem with is the mindfucking and subtle undermining Charlie is engaging most people on here in an attempt at online "Guru Yoga".  This is not the platform for such practice's and I am more than happy to point out the pathological nature of his perspectives, the fact that they are not context dependant so therefore contradict themselves in unhealthy ways. 

I'm afraid I cannot sit and watch this happen. 

His perspective is fine.  Nobody is disputing appropriate punishment for crime.  However, this conversation has been derailed in yet another attempt to inform most of us of something so obvious it's already a given in reality: Criminals are punished by society.  Yes, we get it.  So what?  That's last semesters lesson. 

Yes, some of Charlie's advice can help one find their true self.  But the rest of it is brainwashing.  It's a trick as old as the hills and it's the wrong way to go about enlightnement. 

 

Mal

PS. Ajax, it looks like you're still jumping on the moralizing bandwagon and trying to figure it out.  This I don't blame you for, but adherence to this concept and insufficient integration is blocking you seeing my reality and what's going on under your nose.

No hard feelings 

Edited June 9, 2016 by Mal

[Ajax]

@Mal

You are right, I don't know exactly what you are trying to do... I don't want to prevent you from it and you are right I don't fully see your reality. That is why I was debating responding right now because I wanted to take the time to understand it.

Would you clarify it to me in more detail for me? Spoonfeed and baby it for me as I do want to see your perspective, step-by-step.

[Mal]

15 minutes ago, Ajax said:

@Mal

You are right, I don't know exactly what you are trying to do... 

I suggest you read my posts and do the leg work yourself.

Mal

[Ajax]

I had a stressful day and maybe I shouldn't have jumped in this dog-fight.  Might have bitten off more than I could chew. Regardless, I just came back from a long walk and have a much clearer head.

 

3 hours ago, Mal said:

If you read my other posts you will understand that I have no moral issues.  I let all systems be as they are.  You are not grasping the context and subtlety of what I'm doing on this forum. 

 

 

I don't really believe that, virtually everyone has moral issues and if you are judging with any degree of prejudice, you are having blind moral issues. As of the context of what you were saying... I wasn't disputing that I was looking at your debate with Charlie and trying to "untie the knot".

4 hours ago, Mal said:

What I do have a problem with is the mindfucking and subtle undermining Charlie is engaging most people on here in an attempt at online "Guru Yoga".  This is not the platform for such practice's and I am more than happy to point out the pathological nature of his perspectives, the fact that they are not context dependant so therefore contradict themselves in unhealthy ways. 

1. Your parents, girlfriend/boyfriend, friends, teachers, siblings, ect... mind-fuck and undermine you... what makes Charlie different... he represents black marks on a screen... Just about everyone you talk to often claims to be a "guru" at one thing or another... why does this bother you?

2. It is the perfect platform even if it was "Blue" mentality like you said, it is still an opportunity to co-exist and share perspectives... There is some truth behind tradition and dogmatism and the wise will prospect for it.. The test of strength is being able to balance conflicting realities.

4 hours ago, Mal said:

His perspective is fine.  Nobody is disputing appropriate punishment for crime.  However, this conversation has been derailed in yet another attempt to inform most of us of something so obvious it's already a given in reality: Criminals are punished by society.  Yes, we get it.  So what?  That's last semesters lesson. 

The whole reason I got into this discussion was because I thought that you missed the point that he was trying to make. This quote, strengthens that viewpoint.  His point was simple enough as I understand it... It is not violating the "moralizing" principle to openly acknowledge the horrors or the crimes committed. That is it in one sentence...

 

4 hours ago, Mal said:

Yes, some of Charlie's advice can help one find their true self.  But the rest of it is brainwashing.  It's a trick as old as the hills and it's the wrong way to go about enlightnement. 

So is everything I say...

 

4 hours ago, Mal said:

. Ajax, it looks like you're still jumping on the moralizing bandwagon and trying to figure it out.  This I don't blame you for, but adherence to this concept and insufficient integration is blocking you seeing my reality and what's going on under your nose.

I understand moralizing it is just another way of saying "facing without reacting" or "not resisting". These are old but invaluable enlightenment concepts.

I saw your reality I just jumped in the middle or your "fight" with Charlie as for what is going under my nose... well like I said I am more than happy to receive your viewpoint on what is going on... I like to know what is going on under my nose, that is where I eat!

[DizIzMikey]

@BeckoningCat Know who your speaking too

Example

My grandpa is set in his ways

He wouldn't hesitate to kill me if I challenged his world view to the max

Blend in with the zombies the best you can! 

 

Edited June 10, 2016 by DizIzMikey

[Mal]

@Ajax 

You're not dragging me into a vortex of misinterpritive mind games. I'll pass on the "sidelining derail" thanks.

I don't want to hurt your feelings but I've got no problem using force to get a pest off my back. Yes these are pixels. For me that's true. For you it's not. And for a lot of people it's not. You are clearly interpreting life via 1st tier lenses.  I am not.  Until you reach the platform I'm residing you will continue to interpret my reality through your lens.

I put my insight up on the page, self realized people can be run by their shadow and that's what I've pointed out from this example. 

Ajax dude, I have more to do with my time than to get involved with your energy leeching debate.

Respectfully,

Mal

 

Edited June 10, 2016 by Mal

[Ajax]

@Mal

Hmm, I certainly apologize if I offended you. There really is no debate here, I am just curious and ask for details.

If you do not wish to engage on further discourse on the matter it is sufficient to simply say so, instead of of judging it as "mind games" and "energy leeching". Of course, I do get your desire to no longer continue this conversation so I will not discuss the matter further, my intention is simply to point out your misperception concerning me and my intention.

Take care,

Jax

Edited June 10, 2016 by Ajax

[Mal]

52 minutes ago, Ajax said:

@Mal

Hmm, I certainly apologize if I offended you. There really is no debate here, I am just curious and ask for details.

If you do not wish to engage on further discourse on the matter it is sufficient to simply say so, instead of of judging it as "mind games" and "energy leeching". Of course, I do get your desire to no longer continue this conversation so I will not discuss the matter further, my intention is simply to point out your misperception concerning me and my intention.

Take care,

Jax

@Mal@Ajax

I'm not really sure where me spotting an obvious strawman correlates with my misguided misconceptions. You're making yourself look like a fool by not actually reading the texts.

You may not have the life experience or cognitive capacity to spot the difference between an energy leeching debate and a genuine inquiry. However, I do. And judging by the shambles you got yourself involved in with the yogi thread I'm curious as to why you haven't  learned your lesson on this thread.

Practice your digging for assumptions self development techniques elsewhere with somebody who doesn't spot them coming. 

Mal

Edited June 10, 2016 by Mal

[Psychonaut]

I see a lot of "I" in this thread. This I and that I with this and that perspective. Was hoping there would be a conclusion but thanks for the show anyways.