Not so Silent Thought

How does one man think differently
from another? How (not what) do I think?


How do I get lost
in
the
right-wrong
game?

Why is it compelling?

I will contemplate unity to polarity & the RWG in 4525

Tags

  1. silent thought
  2. unquiet thought
  3. flower power
  4. behavior

Comments


Mark de LA says
I can think like a materialist or I can think like an Anthroposophist which only means that I can think from at least those two points of view.  From the point of view of a materialist thinking is a surprise - something that just shows up loosely connected to the spontaneous surprise of memories floating by or something stimulated from a sense organ. Most memories seem to be stimulated by a sensory experience. Every human has a brain (the low priced meat computer) which no scientist is willing to say is much different from any other except in aberrated conditions. Genetics & environment + experience appears to be the main configuring programs for the meat computer.
From an Anthroposophical point of view the brain is a sense organ for thoughts which are beings who are mostly in an unseen, but not unperceived world. Thinking for an Anthroposophist is congress with other beings who are attracted by particular soul states of the person doing the thinking. These soul states are sympathy & antipathy to things in the Cosmos.
Even to Anthroposophists thoughts show up as surprises.
So from these two points of view I will attempt to answer just exactly what I do to have a particular thought.
This particular thought & endeavor was not a surprise altogether as I maintained the desire to pursue it for a couple of hours this AM.  On the other hand while contemplating the particular problems associated with World terrorism I had asked the question to the Cosmic Ooze - "Do they just think differently from US?" or ".. is it just the content of their minds & thoughts & the power of the right-wrong game that leads the terrorists to do things which are insane from my point of View?" I am not willing at this time to just assume the monad perspective that says nothing is inherently insane except in the context you hold it.


Mark de LA says
I shall bring into the picture the nature of something Peter Ralston defines in a particular way as contemplation.  Contemplation is an activity of thought & will directed at a particular question. Contemplation is directed thought. Contemplation is not random thoughts or worries or daydreaming or the right-wrong game or anything else. With contemplation I can hold onto a question for as long as I am able and record or talk to another about what shows up when I put myself into a state of mind to want the answer no matter what it is.  The other thing I will put in here is something Peter defines as the sequence of encounter which relates to where cognition & similar processes show up which are related to the topic under discussion. This is the picture via a mindmap and this is the text of a letter Peter wrote about the subject in a newsletter.





Mark de LA says
So as I perform directed thought (contemplation) I ask a question, seemingly to the Universe or myself, and put myself in the mood to encounter an answer back.  This answer does not always show up in words - it might be in pictures or something else.  The fascinating thing is that the first thing that shows up is not the whole of the answer or necessarily the best answer.  I usually am internally compelled to put words to the answer.  As I blog , naturally I have to put it into words. Unfortunately you usually get the  first answer that shows up & not necessarily the best one. Having gone thru the identification of all the aspects of this sequence of encounter at one time I can say that I have that set of distinctions about the process. The sequence of encounter applies to almost anyone .


Seth says
Magor 2006-07-20 06:40:56 3975
So from these two points of view I will attempt to answer just exactly what I do to have a particular thought.
This particular thought & endeavor was not a surprise altogether as I maintained the desire to pursue it for a couple of hours this AM.  On the other hand while contemplating the particular problems associated with World terrorism I had asked the question to the Cosmic Ooze - "Do they just think differently from US?" or ".. is it just the content of their minds & thoughts & the power of the right-wrong game that leads the terrorists to do things which are insane from my point of View?" I am not willing at this time to just assume the monad perspective that says nothing is inherently insane except in the context you hold it.
I think this is a good point of departure .  Terrorists grow up in a world which you would probably call insane.  I certainly am willing to call their world insane.  Then it is no surprise to me that their thoughts come out to me as insane.  ("Insane" being a label which i have affixed.)   My point is that their world caused those thoughts.  Those thoughts were not just floating around in some "unperceived world".  Those thoughts did not have any existence outside of their minds.   They came from their environment ... from their experiences.  Change that environment and you will change the thoughts.  You get to that point in your paragraph above.  You seem to demonstrate a comprehension of it.  But then you stop there and seem to reject it out of hand.  Why?  Is that just a metaphysical choice you are making based upon your faith? ... or do you have some solid evidence to the contrary?

Mark de LA says
source: ... But then you stop there and seem to reject it out of hand.  Why?  Is that just a metaphysical choice you are making based upon your faith? ... or do you have some solid evidence to the contrary?
... I am a little touchy about calling anything or anyone insane. I also don't like the duality of saying that your world & my world are different when we both inhabit this world. Part of it is the distinction of point of view which goes to the lens with which we view the world & the distortion it provides the user.

    I am not finished with this item yet. It's all there in that cognition area - especially in the interpretation & meaning area.  Note that most people are not aware of a lot of it. The cause-effect-effect-effect...... loop is very short. I suspect in terrorism there is a bad feeling followed by the want to kill somebody.  There is a hypnotic loop brainwashed since childhood into the youth. Those who profit from this would oppose any attempts to implement the ideas in 3932.

Seth says
Magor 2006-07-20 10:04:23 3975
The monad perspective that I mentioned earlier essentially models humans philosophically as individuals all unto themselves without spiritual connections & shared experiences - all running around like pinballs in a very large game of .
The "monad perspective" (as you call it) does not model humans as individuals all unto themselves without shared experiences.  If we share an experience, then we share an experience ... period.  No model can ignore that and be of any predictive value.  Be honest ...  think about it ... excluding the obvious experiences that are common to all homo sapiens living on the earth ... how many experiencs that you have had do you think a Hezbollah has also had ... how many of the experiences that a Hezbollah has had, have you also had ?

Mark de LA says
seth 2006-07-20 09:40:55 3975
Magor 2006-07-20 09:32:43 3975
I also don't like the duality of saying that your world & my world are different when we both inhabit this world.
I don't understand why you would stumble on this part.  You did not grow up in Gaza.  There are very fue if any experience that you share with a Palestinian. 
I'm not stumbling. I don't have to be a Palestinian to understand what is common between Palestinians & Americans which is human. The same goes for Blacks, Mexicans & so forth. We're all doomed if we can't rise to the occasion of being humans.

Mark de LA says
The monad perspective that I mentioned earlier essentially models humans philosophically as individuals all unto themselves without spiritual connections & shared experiences - all running around like pinballs in a very large game of (?eek)!


Seth says
Magor 2006-07-20 10:01:12 3975
seth 2006-07-20 09:40:55 3975
Magor 2006-07-20 09:32:43 3975
I also don't like the duality of saying that your world & my world are different when we both inhabit this world.
I don't understand why you would stumble on this part.  You did not grow up in Gaza.  There are very fue if any experience that you share with a Palestinian. 
I'm not stumbling. I don't have to be a Palestinian to understand what is common between Palestinians & Americans which is human. The same goes for Blacks, Mexicans & so forth. We're all doomed if we can't rise to the occasion of being humans.
It is not a matter of intellectually understanding what is common.  It is a matter of the actual experiences that are different.  Experience changes you.  If you have not gone through those experiences, you will behave differently than if you have gone through them.  This is not an intellectual comprehension of the common expeiences, this is an actual different experience. 

Mark de LA says
It's still not exclusively intellectual. Have you ever heard of sympathy & empathy ? Why must you pretend to be separate? What is the payoff for you & your presumed constituency. What you pretend says (sorry about the reductio ad absurdum) that a representative democracy is absurd & can never work: i.e. only blacks can represent blacks; only hispanics can represent hispanics; only orientals can represent orientals. None of us has all the experiences of any other - so what ? Are we all just monads in a sea of shit squeezed out from the Cosmic Ooze?


Mark de LA says
seth 2006-07-20 10:17:30 3975
Magor 2006-07-20 10:04:23 3975
The monad perspective that I mentioned earlier essentially models humans philosophically as individuals all unto themselves without spiritual connections & shared experiences - all running around like pin-balls in a very large game of .
The "monad perspective" (as you call it) does not model humans as individuals all unto themselves without shared experiences.  If we share an experience, then we share an experience ... period.  No model can ignore that and be of any predictive value.  Be honest ...  think about it ... excluding the obvious experiences that are common to all homo sapiens living on the earth ... how many experiences that you have had do you think a Hezbollah has also had ... how many of the experiences that a Hezbollah has had, have you also had ?
Hmmm... I don't need to have the experience of killing somebody to know it's wrong. That's the beauty of the Golden Rule & the human conscience. That's something that all that are conscious can access.  
    Hezbollah is mostly a bunch of sociopaths & should be isolated from humanity. I will never be an apologist for nor take the side of sociopaths no matter why or how they became so.

Mark de LA says
source: ... The "monad perspective" (as you call it) does not model humans as individuals all unto themselves without shared experiences.
... Hmmm.. that was my philosophical distinction - how do you have the authority to say what it does or does not do ? If we are monads then it's all mine & you have no authority to say otherwise.


Seth says
Magor 2006-07-20 10:20:00 3975
It's still not exclusively intellectual. Have you ever heard of sympathy & empathy ? Why must you pretend to be separate? What is the payoff for you & your presumed constituency. What you pretend says (sorry about the reductio ad absurdum) that a representative democracy is absurd & can never work: i.e. only blacks can represent blacks; only hispanics can represent hispanics; only orientals can represent orientals. None of us has all the experiences of any other - so what ? Are we all just monads in a sea of shit squeezed out from the Cosmic Ooze?
Sorry what i am saying has nothing to do with all of that. 

All i am trying to establish with you is that "point of view" is real.  It is not some intellectual construct that we can choose or not choose.  Oh sure some people are better than others at imagining themselves in someone else's shoes ... but that is not the aspect of this that is on the table.  You cannot witness your mother being raped and then murdered and not have that experience change your subsequent behavior, your context, and your point of view.  That is simply not possible in this world any more than it is possible to throw a pebble in a pond and  have no ripples expand from where it hit the water. 

Mark de LA says
So .... I've already expressed that no person has all the experiences of any other person or all other persons for that matter.
     If I may presume to read between the lines though, you may be about to say that Palestinians, having bad prior experiences at the hands of Jews, justifies their taking bombs & strapping them on their children sending them into a pizza parlor to blow up a random set of people - hopefully Jews & Americans. That will never fly with me. Please assure me that you don't believe that!

Seth says
Magor 2006-07-20 10:33:56 3975
source: ... The "monad perspective" (as you call it) does not model humans as individuals all unto themselves without shared experiences.
... Hmmm.. that was my philosophical distinction - how do you have the authority to say what it does or does not do ? If we are monads then it's all mine & you have no authority to say otherwise.
Good point .

But all i am going on here is your description: X  | " essentially models humans philosophically as individuals all unto themselves without spiritual connections & shared experiences - all running around like pin-balls in a very large game of ."  And i am saying that such an model X would have no predictive value.  I doubt that anyone has seriously proposed such a model of human behavior ... with, of course, with the possible exception of Magor.

Mark de LA says
Just to argue the monad point a little farther into the silly dimension....
We all have different sensory experiences - no sharing. You will see this post with different eyes & different lens & viewpoint from mine.  Truly shared experiences are impossible logically in a materialistic world. The same goes for the other 4 material senses. No shared senses, no shared experience. Too bad, it's almost solipsistic, but for sure it's monadic. It's amazing that we have language & can communicate. But, who knows ... we're all guessing what the other person means.


Seth says
M 2006-07-20 10:51:26 3975
So .... I've already expressed that no person has all the experiences of any other person or all other persons for that matter.
     If I may presume to read between the lines though, you may be about to say that Palestinians, having bad prior experiences at the hands of Jews, justifies their taking bombs & strapping them on their children sending them into a pizza parlor to blow up a random set of people - hopefully Jews & Americans. That will never fly with me. Please assure me that you don't believe that!
Nope i am not dealing with justification here.  That is a different subject.  All i am trying to establish with you is that their point of view is different ... and that point of view is real and tangeable and not something that can be swept away by any thing that is said to them in words.  I could go into the justification aspect here if you wish, but i would prefer to stay on your topic which i take is about thinking and how thoughts spring up and occur to us.

Mark de LA says
source: ... Nope i am not dealing with justification here.  That is a different subject.  All i am trying to establish with you is that their point of view is different ... and that point of view is real and tangeable and not something that can be swept away by any thing that is said to them in words.  I could go into the justification aspect here if you wish, but i would prefer to stay on your topic which i take is about thinking and how thoughts spring up and occur to us.
...people have different experiences & different genetics - hence different points of view.. they also have abstract experience as humans... love of their own children, desires to be sustained by the earth in food, clothing & shelter..fear of some things  ..etc. The big point with all of the latter is that that is where you have to go to communicate with those who are not hardened psychopaths.
In one of Richard Bandler's seminars we modeled another to the point we could almost read the other's mind by modeling eachother's posture & body language.  'Tis something to be explored.

Seth says
M 2006-07-20 11:06:52 3975
Just to argue the monad point a little farther into the silly dimension....
We all have different sensory experiences - no sharing. You will see this post with different eyes & different lens & viewpoint from mine.  Truly shared experiences are impossible logically in a materialistic world. The same goes for the other 4 material senses. No shared senses, no shared experience. Too bad, it's almost solipsistic, but for sure it's monadic. It's amazing that we have language & can communicate. But, who knows ... we're all guessing what the other person means.
Yeah your right,  there is not just a little bit of silly there.  Obviously there are different degrees of difference ... some differences are much more important than others.  Having identical experiences (with a sense of identity that is sufficient for lem) is not necessary for an experience to have a very similar effect on a person's personality.  But you are on to something when you say "It's amazing that we have language & can communicate".  I look at actual communication as something that happens rarely.  I think that we assume that we understand what a person means many times where in fact we are totally wrong about it.  Some how we have learned to not make all of that affect our daily lives.  This does, however, underline why words are a less effective means of communication than actions.

Seth says
M 2006-07-20 11:18:58 3975
...people have different experiences & different genetics - hence different points of view.. they also have abstract experience as humans... love of their own children, desires to be sustained by the earth in food, clothing & shelter..fear of some things  ..etc. The big point with all of the latter is that that is where you have to go to communicate with those who are not hardened psychopaths.
I agree !

Mark de LA says
Thoughts lead to behavior.  The problem with the point-of-view thing is that the more people account for their behavior out of a point-of-view conditioned by bad experiences in life , especially childhood, & the part of the world they grew up in.  People then begin to hold the individual to less & less account for his own bad behavior. Indeed, some people suggest these days that "bad" is just a relative term & just about anything is permissible.


Seth says
M 2006-07-20 16:33:05 3975
Thoughts lead to behavior.  The problem with the point-of-view thing is that the more people account for their behavior out of a point-of-view conditioned by bad experiences in life , especially childhood, & the part of the world they grew up in.  People then begin to hold the individual to less & less account for his own bad behavior. Indeed, some people suggest these days that "bad" is just a relative term & just about anything is permissible.
Well yes, there does appear to be that tendency.  However, modern justice systems do hold the individual accountable ... and, imho, rightly so.  To be human is to be adaptable.  To be human is to transcend one's environment.  When it comes to criminal behavior the state holds the individual accountable not withstanding his history  and when it comes to economic consequences the person is held accountable by the marketplace.  In other words, survive or die in society as it exists.  That is just the way the cookie crumbels.  Repealing the law of the jungle would be a bad idea. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2006-07-21 06:54:04 3975
M 2006-07-21 06:45:30 3975
The purpose of the point-of-view comment is merely to point out one of the problems with the duality principle in the my world vs your world context.
... what is your duality principal?  What does it have to do with the fact that the context in which your are thinking is rarely close to the context of your interlocutor?

Zen generally sees the world as unity. Duality says there is a difference between the thing-in-itself & what I perceive - a context most pleasant for materialists & seculars. Monadism suggests that we are all unto ourselves (the proverbial jungle) & that there is no unifying principle among us.  Your results may vary, but the more you come from love & persist in the conversation with whom you are engaging the more you will find that it is possible to have the same point-of-view. 

Mark de LA says
When it comes to criminal behavior the state holds the individual accountable not withstanding his history  and when it comes to economic consequences the person is held accountable by the marketplace. 
Not so! When the trials are in the sentencing phase they take all kinds of witnesses like family members, friends & other character witnesses & history into account.
Anyway, I'm not sure I want to go back to the laws of the jungle as you refer to them. I , personally, have evolved beyond that.
The purpose of the point-of-view comment is merely to point out one of the problems with the duality principle in the my world vs your world context.

Seth says
M 2006-07-21 06:45:30 3975
The purpose of the point-of-view comment is merely to point out one of the problems with the duality principle in the my world vs your world context.
... what is your duality principal?  What does it have to do with the fact that the context in which your are thinking is rarely close to the context of your interlocutor?

Seth says
M 2006-07-21 07:25:24 3975
Zen generally sees the world as unity. Duality says there is a difference between the thing-in-itself & what I perceive - a context most pleasant for materialists & seculars. Monadism suggests that we are all unto ourselves (the proverbial jungle) & that there is no unifying principle among us.  Your results may vary, but the more you come from love & persist in the conversation with whom you are engaging the more you will find that it is possible to have the same point-of-view. 
I believe even RS said that there was a distinction between the thing-in-itself and what is percieved.  I am not familure with the term "Monadism" spelled that way so i guess i'll just take your definition on faith.  I am familure with the term monism.  The best article i found on monism was in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy here, the one in Wikipedai is a bit flakey.  There are several variants of monism, but they all say there is just one substance. Hense the difference between Dualism which says there is physical substance and mental substance and perhaps even spiritual substance.  Personally i don't relate all that much to substance ... rather i relate to process.  For me there are processess that impinge on my awareness and there are those which do not.  In my brand of philosophy mental processess are physical porcessess but the brain has a different view of them than the neurosurgeon.  I see no reason to segment processes between physical and mental.  What you call spirits i might also call spirts ... but the problem with that is that we should not expect that we are talking about the same things ... so why bother.  It is hard enough to speak of the same thing when we can use our senses to verify ... when there are no common senses to verify ... well all bets are off and we end up in a LaLa land.  I am not anti spirti .. i love spirit ... i seek the loving spirits in the things i do ... its just that most of that cannot be communicated.  I am anti LaLa land.

Mark de LA says
Monadism is in the zodiac of philosophy according to Rudolf Steiner in the book Human and Cosmic Thought.  It is associated there with the sign of Sagittarius.  Lotus & Tina are both of that sun sign.  From RS:
source: ... A person with this outlook does not come so far as to picture to himself the individual spiritual beings in concrete terms, as the Spiritist does, but he reflects in the world upon the spiritual element in the world, allowing it to remain indefinite. He calls it

Mark de LA says
monism is NOT the same thing as monadism .


Mark de LA says
It takes 2 to tango - getting sucked into 1722 takes an opponent real or imaginary.

See Also

  1. Thought Grokking or Not ? Reality? with 38 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  2. Thought The Wiki at the Beginning with 29 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  3. Thought A New Respect for The Specific with 17 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  4. Thought A drawing of NOWs in my life with 6 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  5. Thought i am ok ... you are not ok with 5 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  6. Thought ... why The Leviathan is real ... ? with 4 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  7. Thought RWG - A Solution ? with 4 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  8. Thought Illative Force - A Lament with 3 viewings related by tag "silent thought".
  9. Thought Saturday's Flower with 2 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  10. Thought about: using artificial intelligence to influence human behavior with 2 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  11. Thought about: Guardian Unlimited: Mental illness link to art and sex with 2 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  12. Thought Rackets with 2 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  13. Thought Tagging Is A Better Memory Substitute Than Hyperlinking with 1 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  14. Thought I plan to be more ascetic. with 1 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  15. Thought We participate in humanity, by what we do! with 1 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  16. Thought The Silent Thought Project with 1 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  17. Thought From The Garden of the Universe with 1 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  18. Thought Oneness with 1 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  19. Thought Digest Evil & transform it into Good Human Substance with 1 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  20. Thought From Peter Ralstons Latest Newsletter -Fall 2006 with 1 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  21. Thought Two Different Times of an Event, was: Thinking about habits with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  22. Thought Green Peace with 0 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  23. Thought A Moon Flower for a Monday with 0 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  24. Thought A Legislative Solution with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  25. Thought Red Flowers for a Tuesday (Mars) with 0 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  26. Thought My Eating Behavior with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  27. Thought Silent Thought with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  28. Thought via Facebook - Distinction with 0 viewings related by tag "silent thought".
  29. Thought about: Neuroscientists study `mental time travel` with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  30. Thought How to change context: with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  31. Thought Reading between the lines with 0 viewings related by tag "silent thought".
  32. Thought motivating people to answer your questions with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  33. Thought Habit ... with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  34. Thought Green Orchids for a Friday - Venus' Day with 0 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  35. Thought Free Will with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  36. Thought This may be some of the problem with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  37. Thought How hard is it to change our habits? with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  38. Thought I dont have to do that! with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  39. Thought about: Smart Mobs: Socio-cybernetic Decision-Making with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  40. Thought What is the News ? with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  41. Thought Real Flower Power - Heal Fear with 0 viewings related by tag "flower power".
  42. Thought The in-crowd with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  43. Thought White Fences by Dave Winer with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  44. Thought about: strange attractors in human behavior - google search with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  45. Thought I too, hope 2006 is the year of HD User Experiences with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  46. Thought BETTER BEHAVIOR with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  47. Thought Tiny Habits with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  48. Thought Discipline Help: Classroom or Home with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  49. Thought Changing Society with 0 viewings related by tag "behavior".
  50. Thought [title (3964)] with 0 viewings related by tag "flower power".