The Skeleton Key Action (for Every Situation)

[OKO]

Now: Exclude inessential psychological effort. Allow me to explain:

When you step on poop, you could complain or execute a more fit response (like scraping the poop off and grinding your shoes in the dirt to get rid of the odor). This does not require anger, sadness, or fear concerning the value of the date you are perhaps heading to. Covering the nose would be fine and finding a stick also fine. But wasting vocal cord energy by complaining, or clenching your jaw in anger... that is inefficient. A major cause of suffering is inefficiency.

If near an angry dog, perhaps fear is less essential (thus more inessential) than psychological effort toward determining a best next decision. Perhaps you should spend psychological effort wisely on determining what is the best response, when in the presence of an enemy gunman and given the other variables at hand (such as whether a hostage's eye trajectory gives you away as you sneak up behind the enemy). Exclude inessential psychological effort.

How does Batman do it? If given enough time, Bruce Wayne can evaluate his foe and perhaps defeat them. Thus Batman is a reasoner, because reasoning is reasonable. 

Anger alone cannot change the condition of what one's anger is toward... whereas reasoning and thorough evaluation results in an idea conscerning where to begin. Anger does not even BEGIN like the best response.

Sadness cannot change the condition of what one's sadness is toward... whereas reason and thorough evaluation results in an idea conscerning where to begin Sadness doesn't even BEGIN like the best next response.

Fear alone cannot change the nature  of what one's fear is toward. It and anger are like an extra suffering. Exclude inessential psychological effort, this include what your attention is toward. Again, fear alone cannot change the nature  of what one's fear is toward, fear does not even BEGIN like the best next response.

 

Exclude inessential psychological effort. 

Intellectualism is defined as the exercise of the intellect at the expense of the emotions. Sadness isn't enforcement of change or the beginning of it, neither is fear or anger; sometimes, even happy people act rashly due to their lack of carefulness. Happiness is more for flavor and entertainment. Focus on the essential.

 

Bruce Lee had been vague at times... be efficient, my friends.

Edited January 26, 2017 by Gabriel David

[Leo Gura]

I've found in my journey that lots of action was very helpful in the beginning when I didn't know every much.

But as I learn more, action becomes less and less relevant to growth. The best action becomes simple introspection and genuine contemplation of the problem. And then it tends to melt away and save years of action, years of action in a circle.

One of the problems with people who preach massive action is that they are acting towards things that will NEVER resolve with action.

But of course, true introspection is hard work, and might be called a kind of action.

And external action is still important. Especially depending on where you're at in your growth.

[Pallero]

Isn't rationalization a defence mechanism? This idea seems to be a way to distance yourself emotionally. Isn't that unhealthy?

[OKO]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I've found in my journey that lots of action was very helpful in the beginning when I didn't know every much.

But as I learn more, action becomes less and less relevant to growth. The best action becomes simple introspection and genuine contemplation of the problem. And then it tends to melt away and save years of action, years of action in a circle.

One of the problems with people who preach massive action is that they are acting towards things that will NEVER resolve with action.

But of course, true introspection is hard work, and might be called a kind of action.

And external action is still important. Especially depending on where you're at in your growth.

I had to find a manner of better operating my body. So I began writing a lot (and I mean a lot). But I found that I think faster than I write. So I fell behind and into a circle. I found even more comfort with keyboarding than I found with writing (because it is faster than writing and more aligned with the speed of my thoughts). But my thoughts were faster nonetheless and I began to notice that most thoughts I had were so fast that I had them and forgot them almost immediately. They tended to be the real problem and harder to manage. You see, the more action I made the more variables I Involved, like they say: more money more problems. That's why I know you know a lot Leo. Because you mentioned the "circle" and that more action didn't solve the problem.

I found it easier to do my thinking at my own pace. I found that it wasn't because I involves a lot of action but how I layed the foundation for them. So I wanted to get to the very beginning (as the gnostic gospel quote, "Have you found the beginning that you now search for the end?"). I found that the first actions upon danger were crucial if I wanted full operation and control of my body. So I had to cancel fear because I knew I could identify a gunmen as dangerous without it and with the monotony of thought versus the song of emotion. So I began taking Bruce Lee's advice and "hacking away at the inessential" or more importantly as I say It excluding inessential psychological efforts. Because it all BEGINS in the mind. Thus I found that fear was besides beginning to find a way out of a sticky situation when it happened. So I skip fear now and directly go into reasoning and spending psychological efforts determining what to do next (because fear, anger, and sadness do not accomplish that). Thus, because anger doesn't accomplish that, I skip anger and begin thinking about what can be done. As you said, "But as I learn more, action becomes less and less relevant to growth. The best action becomes simple introspection and genuine contemplation of the problem."

I used to think you were crazier than me until your words correlated with my studies. Thanks Leo. By the way, it wasn't that I thought you were totally crazy. It was just that I felt you had things you couldn't put into words (things which are genius) and that you spoke prematurely. Now I find that it is I who do that. Haha.

 

Edited January 26, 2017 by Gabriel David

[Bronsoval]

On Thursday, January 26, 2017 at 6:12 AM, Pallero said:

Isn't rationalization a defence mechanism? This idea seems to be a way to distance yourself emotionally. Isn't that unhealthy?

Yes.  It is equally unhealthy to allow your emotions to control your actions. There needs to be a balance.  Use rationalization, but allow your emotions to flow through you like electricity through a conduit, not resisting them but embracing them and letting them go.  Use your emotions rationally

[alyra]

avoidance can be both a tool and crutch, but also a fallacy and a trap. The person with the broken leg uses the crutch for balance. but the crutch does not heal the broken arm - and the growth that happens is the arm healing, not the crutch's usage. 

 

in a way inessential effort as you name it feeds off itself and our demons and the environment to fuel itself to the point we collapse. But while we wish to reduce this pattern - we do not wish to avoid it - we actually wish to accept it, and understand that this is natural. there are reasons why this happens - it is not wisdom teeth which only now exist to risk our health, but instead it is the current which pushes us but if out of control swarms us. 

 

fear is the mechanism which teaches us what is risky. anger is the mechanism which teaches us what is obstructing. if we avoid these mechanisms we are blind. but most of us are unaware of these mechanisms at all - and this allows them to control us.  we want to understand our selves, and to do so we must exist with ourselves, good, bad, or irrelevant. and naturally we will over time find ways in which we can drive with intention, no longer the rider carried by the tide.

Edited January 28, 2017 by aryberry

[poimandres]

@Gabriel David

Sounds like you are on the path man. Keep it up!

[OKO]

On 1/27/2017 at 4:40 PM, Bronsoval said:

"Use rationalization, but allow your emotions to flow through you like electricity through a conduit, not resisting them..."

I agree that one should be in the presence of their emotions yet in the process of rationalization, perhaps that shortens my essay... I'll make a new topic because I discovered more information.

In the presence of emotion, yet in the process of rationalization, and not resisting emotion. However, intellectualism is: the exercise of the intellect at the expense of the emotions.

... and I think a better term would deem the emotions present but not disruptive. After all they are an entertainment and flavor in life. Allow me to explain in the next topic because I'll not waste so much space here haha.