We participate in humanity, by what we do!

... not by what we think or feel privately.

to illustrate, thanks Spiritual Ecology's caption on this photo.

"The world is a living spiritual being." Llewellyn Vaughan-Lee

Comments

Seth says

Participating in humanity by doing, does not imply that we do not think and feel about what we are doing.

Seth says

Einai 2014-09-25 13:37:31 17790

seth 2014-09-25 12:28:08 17790

source: mark
No complaints (your word elsewhere is proposal) , just making suggestions for further exposition - since the item content is thin & further elaboration tends to make it even homeopathic. It rings not true when you come from free deeds & love to subjugate (or otherwise diminish equal footing) thinking & feeling below doing. That silly little word not does the job. The tale of our conversations from the point of view of the zodiac are seemingly getting more entrenched rather than less. Mine (Virgo-phenomenology) & Yours(Scorpio-Dynamism) seem inescapable.

Well yes, it is a choice of which direction to place value. If we are to choose the frame of reference to be humanity itself, then what happens privately inside a person, is just not in the network. The only way to get that good stuff out into the humanity network is to actually do something that effects others.

That does make a grand assumption about a spiritual world ... for if the value is in that spiritual world the same as in a person's private world, well then, of course, we wouldn't see it and it would be just as valuable as that which we can see. Incidentally I don't expect that you will be accepting that assumption.

Spiritual World is only a grand assumption for you dear bro. Some could just as well call it the World of Consciousness or the Consciousness World - of being & Beings not something you can find necessarily on Facebook & Google but some portals may exist in unlikely places & likely ones.

Well i may not have said this effectively. The spiritual world, as described by RS, is something that i could interact with only privately. I don't talk about that stuff publicly. People like you, Dottie Zold, and James Stewart talk about anthroposophy publicly and perhaps even interact with it publicly, i don't know. But that interaction which is happening, mostly privately, is miniscule compared to the vast interacting network that i perceive and call humanity. You see this thought is all about what people do privately as opposed to what they do publicly ... and by publicly i mean those thing done such that anyone except themselves can perceive. The grand assumption, that i presume you still believe, is that which you interact with privately as described by RS, is actually participating in the evolution of humanity. Me, i don't believe it is. I don't see how it could possibly participate in evolution, unless it actually does ... er, i mean does publicly.

Seth says

Einai 2014-09-25 10:28:31 17790

seth 2014-09-25 10:16:37 17790

Einai 2014-09-25 09:52:58 17790

seth 2014-09-25 09:33:32 17790

Einai 2014-09-25 09:27:17 17790

Thinking is doing something. Feeling is doing something. Most if not all humans have such capacities. You have not said much.

i mean doing something publicly ... er, so that it can effect other humans. private doing is just that, secret and private and can not effect anybody but yourself.

It is all a cooperative effort of thought-feeling-will . The challenge is to exercise free will via love.
"Love under will" etc.

well yes certainly i agree, "it is a cooperative effort of thought-feeling-will". thing is cooperation and love done privately so that only you are aware of has quite a different effect on the fabric of our lives than when it is done publicly for all those involved to see. Done privately it does not participate in humanity <-- note the use of this plural noun.

Yep, speak for yourself of course. Deeds imbued with love are much more effective than running around saying "I love you" to everyone or anyone in public or with emoteys.

Well part of my message above is that i do believe it applies to everybody listening.

Anyway you have misinterpreted something i said to erroneously mean "merely saying, I love you in a frivolous manner" ....whereas i meant "doing things that actually love". So i am still interested in hearing your complaint about what i am actually saying rather than about what i certainly was not saying.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-25 12:28:08 17790

Seth says

Mark de LA says

Yeah, IMHO (which is neither) you are still hung up in the secrecy-privacy versus no secrets & publicity thingy. The Bozo-GW polarity is still alive for you, eh? No need to go there for me. I have no such hang-ups. Nobody limits me except myself. I am open to whatever shows up. I did get a lot of training in quality assurance in my career which basically says test it to see if it works; don't believe just because it is written somewhere in the manual (or on a blog). The World of Consciousness is my Playground - may be so until the end if there is one.

Werner Erhard speaks a lot of bringing things, declarations, who you are out into the World. Which notion probably aligns with your stuff. It does not, however, limit the humanity stuff to just the deeds which show up for others to look at.

Seth says

Here is another way this is said in a popular meme ...

thanks G+

Mark de LA says

Maybe! Behavior is also what we don't do for some value of "better".

Seth says

source: mark
Werner Erhard speaks a lot of bringing things, declarations, who you are out into the World. Which notion probably aligns with your stuff. It does not, however, limit the humanity stuff to just the deeds which show up for others to look at.

I did not say anything about "limiting humanity" to that which happens publicly. That is just a notion you have added here yourself. Whatever values a person creates (or finds) internally can certainly be profound and sublime (add your own favorite superlative) .. but that is what is in it for you ... that is just for you personally. But, unless expressed, it does not participate in what makes up humanity.

Incidentally i see no reason why the same principle does not work exactly the same in the spiritual world described by RS and/or in the Zen view of Buddha. This is not about denying spirituality, this is about accepting Karma or cause and effect.
This is really a very simple yet startling understanding

. It is true. If you think just about it, independent of your attitude towards me, i think even you will have to acknowledge it ... though perhaps you will not be able to do so publicly

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-27 08:58:33 17790

. It is true. If you think just about it, independent of your attitude towards me, i think even you will have to acknowledge it ... though perhaps you will not be able to do so publicly

Yeah, I know you didn't say it - I SAID IT! Sorry if these are only your ideas - which they mostly are.

Hmm.... I wonder where ideas come from? WTF good are they? Are they just a byproduct of the electro-chemical brain storm shit passed on in language?

Hmm..2.. I wonder where the language comes from with which to clothe the electro-chemical brain shit-storm ?
..
never mind ..
sorry ...
you didn't say or ask any of this ...
thanks for the attitude adjustment ..
some other day, ..
maybe or not

Seth says

source: mark
Yeah, IMHO (which is neither) you are still hung up in the secrecy-privacy versus no secrets & publicity thingy. The Bozo-GW polarity is still alive for you, eh?

Well I have no doubt that my being was shaped by how GW structured my early life. It would be silly to deny it.

But I can see the same dynamics working in everyone i meet, even including you. I notice those people who are truly in the world with what they say and do, and those who are more just into themselves privately. Some demonstrate that they actually comprehend the effect of their outside on others. Their insides do not get in the way of that. Me, i am notoriously bad at that. You, well mostly you do not even seem to acknowledge the dimension exists

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-27 09:19:16 17790

source: mark
Yeah, IMHO (which is neither) you are still hung up in the secrecy-privacy versus no secrets & publicity thingy. The Bozo-GW polarity is still alive for you, eh?

Yeah, that may be what it looks like inside the walled-garden. The lives of men tend to oscillate between public doings & private doings throughout life. In my middle years I was a lot more public than I am now. I was very public as an officer in the navy. Furthermore after leaving the navy I got into the hippie culture & PJ2. Then I worked for years for a series of companies as both a programmer & a manager & finally settled into official retirement. I am not an agitator in public life. I enjoy reflecting & occasionally writing about things without having to produce stuff to make my ego-self shine in public. Who is to say which part is more valuable ? (What piece of karma leads to what?)

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-28 12:16:24 17790

source: mark
One can't help but participate! The long chain of cause ... effect ..effect ...etc & the butterfly effect has it's result in all we do nobody is immune, nobody is an island.

Well that is the very principal that i am contradicting. If a experience is kept private, it does not participate in the cause and effect chain ... even at a minuscule level like the butterfly effect.

Enjoy your labyrinth. I won't get caught in it.

Seth says

source: mark
One can't help but participate! The long chain of cause ... effect ..effect ...etc & the butterfly effect has it's result in all we do nobody is immune, nobody is an island.

Seth says

This almost needs to be said here ... and not just because it occurred here in sequence:

I was just watching my slid show in which all of my pictures scroll when my computer is not being typed upon. I claim it enhances my memory. A strange thought occurred to me. Do i ever do things exclusively for them to show up here in my slide show and in my memory?

... and surly I do

.

... again, no judgement involved.

I just discussed this at leangth with Denise. Of course it must be said that most of my pictures are my own private affair ...titty nipples being a case in point. They will never be shared publicly. They are just there in my memory for my own private enjoyment.

Seth says

Einai 2014-09-27 09:51:17 17790

Sorry, I left out of thje mini-bio the seminar years following GW's death when I explored quite publicly Tony Robbins, Tad James, Landmark Education (much private to public doings & many forum leaders), Peter Ralston, Michael Hadley, Richard Bandler, & occasionally now the writings of some of them like Peter & Werner Erhard. I am fascinated by the NOWbie crowd & LOA off-shoots of pellic zen.
Who knows what plays into what? I enjoy exploring the dimensions of politics & what moves groups, but I prefer thinking of the higher notion of human beings & humanity rather than the identity groups below.

Thanks for sharing this part of your bio. I too share your fascination with the "NOWbie crowd & LOA off-shoots of pellic zen" ... (er, nicely constructed references ... i like them). And I too have experience the Erhard train and have been effected by the whole new aged thinking and the living theater of hippy and anti hippy memeblowing.

It does, however, beg the question: does personal awareness of what's happening in humanity count for participating in the happening?

Seth says

Einai 2014-09-27 09:31:43 17790

seth 2014-09-27 09:19:16 17790

source: mark
Yeah, IMHO (which is neither) you are still hung up in the secrecy-privacy versus no secrets & publicity thingy. The Bozo-GW polarity is still alive for you, eh?

Yes of course

... and there is no element of judgement in my claim. It is just a simple observation of what happens (or doesn't happen) in human interaction. It applies to all of us equally: Unexpressed private behavior that never gets expressed can not participate in humanity. That activity, however grand, is just for each of us personally.

Incidentally, somtimes people do things in the world to "make their ego-self shine in public", other times they do things because they see they need to be done. Vanity can be a motivator, yet most people find vanity in and of itself to be ugly. Me personally, i specialize in the beauty of ugly, but then that is just my peculiar niche ... and i am not so very sure i have sufficiently filled it

Seth says

source: mark

What does the rear end of a cow make you want to do?
Basically NLP would call what you describe as Pavlovian anchoring.

well it made me want to take a picture for my memory and even, in this case, to blog publicly. Unfortuantely the pictures in my cloud of human cleavage, to which these utters must needs be compared for the entire experience, are private to me and me alone

. So unfortunately i can only refer to that pattern in my words. Mabe you will see it ... maybe you will not.

Obviously this is not about Pavlovian anchoring ... that i am attracted to cleavage is not even something that needs to be questioned. This is rather about what is public and what is private.

Seth says

choy 2014-09-28 09:33:21 17790

Yep, I flatly disagree with the premise.

Actually i had rather expected that you would flatly disagree with this premiss.

... and, er, not just because *I* said it.

source: mark
You just don't have the whole picture of the Consciousness World. Argumentation is a doing. I don't think you are the ultimate judge of what participates in humanity.

Most of that has nothing to do with this premiss ... and only relates to your thoughts about me and yourself. For example, obviously I am not the ultimate judge of what participates in humanity ... that did not even need to be said. And that i might have the whole picture of the Counciousness World is a proposition too silly to even commit to bits on a blog.

But you mentioned a new term that must needs be discussed in this context, "the Consciousness World"

. And i think even we will agree that is part of humanity. Ok, kewl

, what else do we know from personal experience about this vast thingy?

Seth says

You know i don't really think this has anything to do with me personally and i don't even think it belongs in the class of conceptions that can be called "opinion" ... it is not a subjective perception.

Rather it is more like an axiom or assumption, like for example, "parallel lines meet at infiinity (or not)". It does restrain the universe one way or another. Just like the gemetric choice does. It makes a difference to our existence. Either "We participate in humanity by what we do, not by what we think or feel" or "Any behavior, even private behavior, makes humanity what it is and will become". Of course there is another alternative axiom to choose from: nothing matters and humanity is just a collection of animals who's actions matter no more than dung beetles zigging left instead of zagging right.

We participate in humanity, by what we do!

Tags

Comments

See Also