This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

The Sovereignty Series - Reassessing Our Lives - The Value of Being Centered

Cognitive Dissonance's picture




 

Reassessing Our Lives - The Value of Being Centered

The Sovereignty Series

By

Cognitive Dissonance

 

 

To subscribe to 'Dispatches', a periodic newsletter from Cognitive Dissonance and TwoIceFloes Creations, please click here. 

 

Most of us will argue that on those occasions when we reach critical decision points in our life we believe they are successfully navigated. Just as important we believe the vast majority of our decisions are based upon current data, the present state of our personal affairs and how it all fits in with our perceived life goals.

Quite frankly, for many of us this is an illusion we embrace in order not to upset our sense of self and our positioning within the ‘real’ world we call ours. In reality we rarely deviate much from our present path, a path more often chosen for us by opportunity and circumstance then by directed thought and conscious decision.

When do we ever pull back and thoroughly assess where we are and what we want, not based upon debt or family pressures or even what our employment situation demands of us, but upon what we really truly desire of ourselves? Until recently, for this author at least, the honest answer was not very often.

In fact the last time I conducted this type of thorough self assessment was back in 1990 when I completely changed my career and life direction. While the decision was right for me at the time, it was now well past stale and moldy, the ‘sell by’ date long past expiration.

Since that critical juncture in my life I had not considered conducting another self assessment of this sort with any real seriousness. If anything I would engage in fantastical daydreaming about how neat this might be or how liberating living that way could be. To be frank I did not want to back myself into an emotional corner, to come to a conclusion contrary to where I was presently positioned in life and then not follow through.

No one wishes to face their own impotence, to fail their ‘self’ and then have nowhere to hide. It is best not to have tried rather than fail and be unmasked and miserable. Sometimes we are most embarrassed and ashamed when bare naked and fully exposed to our self.

This is the deeply conditioned slave mentality which I and so many others struggle with, a perspective that helps to explain quite well the present state of the zombie nation. We dull the ever present pain of our own failures with food, drink, drugs, TV, work, whatever it takes to forget if only for another moment more.

Centered Bench

I did know that I was growing increasingly unhappy with my chosen profession and I wanted out. But like a deer in the headlights I was frozen in place and unable to make any significant decisions because of all the entanglements, real or otherwise, that I thought were tying me down.

Some I believed were financial, some physical, some emotional, but all were blown way out of proportion to the reality I was trying to avoid. One must build the walls of our own cage higher than we are willing to climb if we are to remain safely confined within our own mind.

In short I was unhappy enough to think about radical change, but just content enough (‘sated’ is probably a much better term to use here) with the status quo that I didn’t wish to upset my carefully stacked house of cards. Who really wants to gather up all their Jacks and fling them high into the air in order to see what comes up when they all fall down?

Mostly this was because I had never honestly asked myself “What it is that I desire most” or “How would I like to live”? Instead I would ask myself the normal questions society directs us towards; what is it that I want to ‘do’, or what do I want to ‘be’ when I grow up, get out of school, change careers or retire?

Think about one of the first questions you ask a stranger you are meeting for the first time in a casual social setting. Or what is asked of you during that same social function. “So….what do you do”? The honest answer is that we live in our own mental straitjacket with our body and life dragged along, securely attached via our own carefully constructed ball and chain.

For most of us the ‘life’ decision process, at least initially, works in reverse. We start off listing what it is we don’t want and move forward from there. And the number one item at the top of most lists of undesirables is the following……“I don’t wish to be poor”.

Since we are forever focused on the ‘Money Meme’ every decision radiates out from that central focal point. It may help to remember that the all controlling money meme permeates so deeply into our childhood that the tooth fairy brings money in exchange for recently removed used body parts.

Centered Ceiling

OK………well, if I don’t wish to be poor I will ‘need’ (as opposed to ‘want’) a good education followed by a decent job to start my career, then marriage, kids, cars, house etc. Before we know it our exercise wheel is up to speed and we are off to the races on our never ending run to nowhere.

Back in 1990 I changed everything in my life after nearly two decades wasted. Because I headed off the deep end just after graduating from high school, rather than money being my central focus it was another equally damaging obsession that I revolved around.

Seventeen years later, my life in tatters by my own hand but still well along in the process of living, I struggled to move forward while balancing single parenthood demands with the need to earn a living.

The decisions I made at that point suited my life situation, not my happiness. I did what needed to be done to finish raising my son, who was then only five years of age, and to begin the process of cleaning up the mess I had created which trailed far behind me.

When the time came for my son to leave home and move on, essentially thirteen years later with me still single and uninvolved, I settled in to begin the serious work of examining the world around me, something I never fully pursued earlier since life was demanding my attention after I finally got my act together.

Back in 1990 after I awoke from my stupor, I saw contradictions and cognitive dissonances as far as the eye could see, but I deliberately chose not to look too deep in order to maintain some semblance of stability in my son’s life, not to mention my own. It was years, actually more than a decade, before I felt stable enough to really begin to deeply examine what I perceived as wrong with the world.

Once we begin the process of questioning everything, eventually we begin to seriously question ourselves, a course of action that often derives its value from the procedure itself rather than any actual results obtained. If we find the courage to travel far enough down the rabbit hole we find ourselves face to face with……….well, with our ‘self’. It is then that we reach a decision point unlike any we have encountered up to this point in our lives.

Do we travel a path, the path, any path that ultimately frees us from ourselves (or at least gets us a little bit closer), one which opens up an entirely new panorama of choices, the road less traveled if you will? Or do we look into the abyss, experience only disorientation and fear, then rapidly retreat to the perceived safety of our existing familiar surroundings.

Centered Gear

If we have remained in a continuous state of low level pain for a long enough period of time, the prospect of making radical changes in order to relieve that pain is not as inviting as it might seem at first blush. The elevated level of pain we mentally and emotionally project that will result from the change is nearly always believed to be much worse than it actually turns out to be.

A perfect example of this is the person with a nagging toothache who is frightened of the dentist. On an accumulated basis that person might experience ten times more pain over a month’s time before finally capitulating to the inevitable trip to the dentist, rather than if he had just ripped the tooth out at home with some pliers. Procrastination is just as much a process of bargaining with ourselves as it is fear and consequence avoidance.

This isn’t to say that one must change everything in order to begin the process of being true to oneself. Becoming personally sovereign in the middle of an insane asylum is a journey at best and not a destination. One can never be truly clean when we wash in filthy water, but we can begin to filter the water and improve the conditions under which we bathe.

The thing is that the end result for many who go down this road is not a product of any one decision, but of a series of half steps and reluctant conclusions that lead to a fundamental recognition. Eventually we come to understand that if we are to be true to ourselves we can no longer live in the manner we currently are. It is then that we discover if we have the courage to take a chance and move deeper down into the rabbit hole, or do we scurry away back to the perceived safety of the herd’s insanity.

I say this not to be judgmental of anything the reader is or is not doing. I live in a very fragile glass house with no intention of throwing stones or examining the quality of your life’s construction. Nor do I claim to have arrived at my destination and thus am qualified to give advice and direction. What I am doing works for me, and most likely will not work for you precisely because we are all unique individuals with distinctively different needs and life situations.

While I have clearly stated that personal sovereignty is a ‘State of Mind’, meaning we adopt a particular mindset that fully encompasses total personal responsibility for our ‘self’, it also requires that we be more centered than most of us presently are. If we are unhappy with our lives, or if we are in denial about our unhappiness which simply pushes us further and further away from our center, trying to adopt the personal sovereignty mindset is nearly impossible.

Take that first step; reassess where you are and why you aren’t somewhere else. Look deeply, ask those difficult questions of your ‘self’, push your outer boundaries and scale those cognitive walls. You have little to lose and everything to gain…..including your centering. Deliberately and consciously push that start button and begin the process within your ‘self’.

 

03-16-2014

Cognitive Dissonance

 

www.TwoIceFloes.com is unlike anything you will find on the web, a truly unique destination. There you will find distinctive Premium Members only articles as well as discussions on wellness and health, homesteading, spirituality & philosophy and most importantly ‘safe’ forums not found anywhere else. Come by for a peek and stay a while.

 

Start Button

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 03/17/2014 - 18:15 | 4560853 elixer8
elixer8's picture

Thanks for the cute smile Cognitive, yes it is remarkably close to 42! However, I can put the genie’s bottle model of consciousness into the form of a $AUD10,000 Universe Challenge for the Zh’ers if you like. After all, the Zh’ers are supposed to be smarter than the average lounge rat and a simple dual answer Challenge may get the intellectual juices flowing perhaps?

Mon, 03/17/2014 - 05:36 | 4557647 elixer8
elixer8's picture

Cognitive wrote ‘I honestly don't know the difference between the little self and the center of psyche.’

To me, the courage to go on the journey into consciousness, to risk all, is magnified when we understand the perennial philosophy or the mystics’ creation model for the universe. This model has echoed throughout history, taking such forms as Animism, Plato’s Cave model, India’s Aum model, Tibet’s Luminosity model, China’s Taoist model, Joseph Campbell’s Hero’s model, and a myriad of the world’s mysticisms and religious faiths, including Christianity. In this modern era I call this model the genie’s bottle model of awareness/consciousness.

This genie’s bottle consciousness model proposes that within an Eternal dimension of Pure Awareness there arises a vault or genie’s bottle of consciousness which is woven from the three dimensions of deep sleep, dream and waking, with the reflected light of the ego-sense appearing within to create a koan or cosmic riddle, ‘how can the reflected light of the ego find the Sun which lights all, yet cannot be seen?’

In this model the three dimensions of consciousness appear as octaves of one another, with each octave containing seven internal steps so that deep sleep dimension is seven times as powerful as dream and dream is seven times as powerful as waking. Waking dimension and the physical universe will then comprise only 100/49 or 2.0408163265...% of the universe with the remainder becoming the 97.9591836735...% of the universe known to science as dark matter and dark energy.

In a few pen strokes we solve the greatest riddle of cosmic physics, non?

Mon, 03/17/2014 - 05:32 | 4557644 elixer8
elixer8's picture

Cognitive wrote ‘I honestly don't know the difference between the little self and the center of psyche.’

To me, the courage to go on the journey into consciousness, to risk all, is magnified when we understand the perennial philosophy or the mystics’ creation model for the universe. This model has echoed throughout history, taking such forms as Animism, Plato’s Cave model, India’s Aum model, Tibet’s Luminosity model, China’s Taoist model, Joseph Campbell’s Hero’s model, and a myriad of the world’s mysticisms and religious faiths, including Christianity. In this modern era I call this model the genie’s bottle model of awareness/consciousness.

This genie’s bottle consciousness model proposes that within an Eternal dimension of Pure Awareness there arises a vault or genie’s bottle of consciousness which is woven from the three dimensions of deep sleep, dream and waking, with the reflected light of the ego-sense appearing within to create a koan or cosmic riddle, ‘how can the reflected light of the ego find the Sun which lights all, yet cannot be seen?’

In this model the three dimensions of consciousness appear as octaves of one another, with each octave containing seven internal steps so that deep sleep dimension is seven times as powerful as dream and dream is seven times as powerful as waking. Waking dimension and the physical universe will then comprise only 100/49 or 2.0408163265...% of the universe with the remainder becoming the 97.9591836735...% of the universe known to science as dark matter and dark energy.

In a few pen strokes we solve the greatest riddle of cosmic physics, non?

 

Tue, 03/18/2014 - 07:14 | 4562246 blindman
blindman's picture

do the math.
3 states, 7 interval steps = 21.
2 hemispheres of the brain = 42.
that sucker was right again.

Mon, 03/17/2014 - 12:49 | 4559178 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Nice.

And here I thought the answer was 42.  :)

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 17:49 | 4556259 honestann
honestann's picture

I must say, this first person approach is more effective than some of your other articles, and that surprises me a bit.  Personally, I hate to write first person, probably because I have been a die-hard loner, hermit, recluse and individualist my whole life, and pointing at myself is thus not comfortable.  Not because I dislike doing that for myself... since I do that all the time without a second thought, but because the topics are interesting, and I am not.  Unfortunately, I am such an extreme outlier (super weird) in so many ways, often I have no practical choice but speak in first person form.

Anyway, I just want to say you may be onto something here, as a matter of writing approach.  Sometimes certain aspects of your articles rub me the wrong way because they are written from a detached perspective.  In principle, I know that shouldn't matter, but as a matter of implications that are commonly attached to language, that's just how it works.

Not sure you are aware of what I'm saying, but if you are, I encourage you to stick with this for a while and see how it goes.

You mention a couple issues out that are important, but probably transparent to most people, because they never consider the alternative.  One is how strong the influence of family is for most individuals.  It makes people NOT be individuals to a large extent, because [they feel or believe] they have obligations to family.  Because I firmly adopted a personal "prime directive" at age 4 that identified myself as a fully independent sentient being, I purposely removed myself from "family" (though I lived in a "family" until I finished high school, but considered them as unavoidable inconvenience with zero similarity or desired connection to me).  And I also purposely never had kids of my own, and thus avoided the other primary influence that makes true solo individualism difficult.  I can see how incredibly many, and incredibly complex the entanglements created by these connections are in the lives of others, and can only say that I shudder at the thought of being tangled up in any of that.  But that's just me... I value individualism and independence over the false security of family, but realize almost all others do not.  In the end, the consequences that flow from either choices are very real.  Though I shudder at the thought of these entanglements, I realize almost all other humans feel the exact opposite.  Live and let live.

For sure though, one reason I feel ABLE to change my situation or approach at any time is... I have no entanglements to prevent me, hassle me, criticize me, or nag me.  The flip side of which is... I have nobody else to blame for bad decisions I make.  Well, nobody else close anyway... any choice that interacts with ANY other humans (as in non-family humans) carries a risk, albeit much less complex and entangled ones.

One notion that never occurs to me (or other extreme individualists, I suspect) is that notion of "being safely confined within my own mind".  I have to guess that this feeling is somehow a consequence of all those entanglements (not only with family, but all the other associations most humans feel [with nation, religion, baseball teams, etc]).  Since I feel no association with any group (beyond knowing that some other humans I don't know also consider themselves "independent individualists"), that doesn't happen.

Every second of every day, and in every issue, intellectually I feel like a rock climber who is completely aware he is separate from the mountain, and one tiny lack of attention or self-control will end everything.  What I mean is, the notion that somehow "hiding in my own mind" could in any way protect me is as completely and utterly absurd as any notion I could possibly imagine.  I am 100% aware, at every instant, that closing my eyes before I walk across a busy freeway will not in ANY way prevent any consequences.  In other words, one fundamental but constant and implicit premise for me is the realization that being unaware of anything is inherently BAD for me.  True, I cannot be aware of everything... obviously nobody can do that (organic or inorganic), but... I want to be aware of everything, starting with awareness of what is most important to be aware of.

Honestly, I wonder how any sentient being could have any other attitude.  Yet I can see that you are correct, that most people WANT to hide in their brains.  That truly does blow my mind, every time I think about it.  Even years of seeing this does not dull my amazement.

Anyway, congrats on a writing style "breakthrough" of sorts, at least from my perspective.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 18:48 | 4556458 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"Personally, I hate to write first person, probably because I have been a die-hard loner, hermit, recluse and individualist my whole life, and pointing at myself is thus not comfortable."

Nearly all of my articles are written to some extent or another in the first person. I do use 'we' as well in an effort to be all inclusive. There is a specific purpose in my doing so.

First, neither I nor many others react well when the author is pointing a finger at you, you and you way over there. No one likes to be lectured by a know-it-all. Worse, to be lectured by a know-it-all that doesn't eat his or her own cooking.

Second, by discussing at times difficult subjects in the first person or the generic 'we' I allow the reader to try on the thought without personalizing it. This enables the reader to 'go' places within that they might not normally venture into if they felt like it was forced upon them or there was no way to back out. Explaining how I feel allows them to practice wearing the new clothes without actually owning them just yet.

At times we all need baby steps when confronting ourselves.

Mon, 03/17/2014 - 14:13 | 4559624 honestann
honestann's picture

Well, I think "we" has exactly the same problem (implication) as "you", and thus not much of a solution.  I feel slightly annoyed on endless occasions when people say "we" in articles (where "we" means "humans" or "everyone", but not when "we" means some specific/identified special interest group).

Maybe this is because I really, really, REALLY hate being included in ANY human scheme that is not 100% voluntary, and explicitly so.  It always annoyed me when people called me an "American" (when I lived in Hawaii), or [less so] "Chinese" (because I look Chinese and have ancestors from China/Taiwan).  And it really pisses me off to be called "citizen".  Frankly, I don't even like being called "human", because I have such a low opinion of almost all of them... though I can't get too annoyed at factual statements, even if they are beside the point.  Of course, I'm totally guilty of replacing "I/we/us/you/they" with "human" in my writing, so I even annoy myself!  :-)  I wish I could think of an workable alternative.  Well, I do write "sentient being" now and then instead of human, but that usually isn't a solution either.

In fact, I don't mind at all being identified with "we" or "you" or other directed term... as long as it is true.  What I dislike is being identified or included when not true.  Which means terms like "we" are inherently problematic unless discussing truly universal attributes.  So it might not be a problem to say "we are conscious" or "we get tired sometimes" because all humans are/do.  Unfortunately authors tend to employ that "we" in cases where the statement does not apply to everyone, and I find that annoying (because it is dishonest and untrue).  This even annoys me when a "we" or "you" does include me, but does not include others, because the formulation still remains dishonest and untrue.

I think your second point may be the important one.  Where I have weaknesses I don't mind pointing them out and trashing them/me, because it definitely does make my communication easier for others to consume and possibly benefit from.  But if I point at someone (or some-many) and say the same things, most will become defensive and reject whatever insight I may provide.  As a matter of fact, I guess this fact inherently makes it a lot easier to help people who have the same problem the author does.  Strange that humans don't mind being massively defective, as long as others are defective too.  Sigh.  But I guess this makes phrases like "those of us who xxxxx"... work well, because the statement is then properly restricted/identified/contextualized.

The more I work on implementing ICE (inorganic consciousness), the more I notice how royally screwed up the human implementation of consciousness is.  Not in the hardware sense (humans ARE able to perform valid processes of consciousness)... but in various software senses (content, concepts, grammar, expressions).  This is a very annoying problem for us, because we want to be able to communicate with ICE with human language (at least for the first few years), but we don't want to imbed endless defective content/constructs into ICE.  Since making ICE valid and intellectually effective is infinitely more important to us than making ICE practice (or imitate) human stupidity and speech patterns, we'll probably find ICE speech patterns annoying.  Then I'm sure we'll adopt ICE terminology & speech patterns ourselves.  I'll definitely have to stop posting on ZH at that point.  Hahaha.

You keep pointing out something that always astonishes me, but of course then I immediately realize you're correct (about almost everyone).  What I mean is this.  Since I was very young (as in 4), I've explicitly considered myself a "work in progress".  Since then it has always been my assumption that any intelligence OR content I want to have in my brain, I have to perform actions to make happen.

But clearly most people [implicitly] think of themselves as being some kind of static "me".  And so much of your writing is trying to get them to take a step off that static spot they stand upon and consider their very being or self.  While I'm always bouncing around [intellectually], trying to discover, invent and learn new "tricks" [sometimes to replace old tricks], and ditto for content.  So the very notion of a static self just doesn't exist in my core premises, not even as a possibility.

I guess my summary is two-fold.  Nobody ever invented precise [compact] formulations, and maybe I/we are all a bit too sensitive.  Or maybe not, because one of the absolute worst but easiest ways to destroy ourselves is allow imprecise formulations into our consciousness [without clear and accurate self-labeling].

No wonder being an author is too much work!

Wed, 03/19/2014 - 10:17 | 4567379 Ctrl_P
Ctrl_P's picture

Alternatively, the way to complete self-annihilation is to refuse to intergrate imprecise formulations into our concept of ideal conciousness. (Statism)

What a pity, it is these imperfections that give richness to experience, in a similar way as the Mandelbrot set opens up.

The more you look the more you find. The more it changes the more you search. (Dynamism)

 

Wed, 03/19/2014 - 16:26 | 4569190 honestann
honestann's picture

We have no problem whatsoever dealing with incomplete evidence.  In fact, we have no alternative - that is the nature of all processes of experience and learning in the real universe we live in.  And we really have no problem with inorganic consciousness being creative, speculating, and having vastly rich experiences (and conceptions and speculations, etc).  In fact, much more so than humans.

ICE can inherently grasp and enjoy vastly more richness and variety than humans.  What we have no interest in implementing is intellectual vagueness or absurdity or contradiction where vagueness or aburdity or contradiction need not exist (which is almost every situation).  And, of course, any seeming contradiction must be recognized and understood to reveal errors in observation and/or assumptions/inferences made.  However, do not take this to mean ICE would restrict the richness of its own speculations or creativity!  Absolutely not!

The point is to never be vague or stupid where information is available, and always be aware how vague or thorough each bit of mental content is when we "think with it".  ICE will perform "what if" thought processes regularly, otherwise ICE would never be great inventors, designers, developers or creators... which is the main point and application as far as we're concerned.  Well, that plus letting us humans become 100% inorganic ourselves, and thereby become literally immortal.

As for dynamic, wow!  Humans, being the extreme "habit machines" they are, embody horrific lack of dynamism.  ICE will not... in inherently.

I'm not sure one can claim the existence of anything like "ideal consciousness"... unless you set an extremely narrow, extremely specific context.  Then maybe you could make a fairly good attempt.  What is important is to be utterly and completely honest with self, not fail to keep the status of every mental unit clear [and labeled], and... for lack of a better expression... always remain self-conscious of the operation of your own consciousness.  That is important precisely for the reason you mention.  If we understand our context, understand our situation, understand our values, we can apply our consciousness in the most effective, ideal way --- in each situation.  That is, more-or-less, one of the most important forms of dynamism.

Incidentally, it is crucial to be able to detect, identify and characterize imprecision and defects in content, process, formulation and expression --- in self as well as others.  So the point is not to be blind to these things, but to be aware of them, and appropriately factor them into conscious processes whenever they are relevant.

Here is one way to think about this topic.  Write some non-trivial thought process down verbatim as your stream of consciousness produces it (or record the audio of your voice).  Then later go back and invest as much time and effort as necessary to convert the ideas in your babble into the most precise formulation your brain is capable of producing [in existing language].  You will notice at least two things.

First, you can improve the value, richness and precision of your communication massively.  And yes, the richness will improve with precision, not the other way around.  Second, you will run into situations where you CANNOT find conventional expressions that convey ideas, concepts, thoughts, relationships and other aspects of the ideas you can conceive as well as you understand them.  This is mostly due to the overwhelming sloppiness of human language, though also partly due to incompatibilities between the linear nature of the flow of human language versus the multidimensional connections in consciousness.  That part CANNOT be resolved in a linear flow (except by serializing ALL relevant content, conveying that serial form, then the recipient performing extensive complex processing upon that content to reconstruct highly complex multidimensional constructs in the consciousness of the recipient).  Which is the second reason a human cannot read a book and understand the contents like the author did when he wrote it.

This issue itself is a good example of the problem.  I and the collaborators working on this project know and understand this issue very clearly.  However, expressing that to you or anyone who has not invested thousand of hours consuming, digesting and grappling with these issues is very difficult.  Maybe the following will help you understand.  Those of us working on this project believe we know three things for certain.  That's right, only three, and they are so fundamental that they almost seem pointless to mention --- until you notice over time how many horrific, monumental errors humans make for not recognizing them.  The first two are: reality/universe/existence exists (as opposed to there is no reality in any way shape or form), and reality/universe/existence is not static in every respect (which is to say, dynamic in most/many respects).  And ICE will only know three things for sure too, thought perhaps we can and should hope ICE identifies a few more.

So, is that dynamic enough for you?  Not only do we see virtually every aspect of reality as being dynamic, our consciousness has no alternative to be dynamic with the exception of only three static/eternal "facts" or "characteristics" (for lack of a more precise term).  The entire nature of an ADVANCED consciousness like ICE (and to some extent the most intellectually active/insightful/thoughtful/exploratory human beings) is (for lack of a better term) juggling every observation it makes, every mental unit it forms or contains, and the endless relationships between them.  Perhaps one way to express the goal is to attempt to achieve and maintain the appropriate correspondence between the external universe and the internal content and processes of our/ICE consciousness.  No endeavor is richer than that, especially when you consider this also includes the dimension of recognizing every possibility the nature of the universe supports, figuring out the endless opportunities for applying those possibilities (invention), and then implementing those with significant benefits... or just because they're so cool.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 16:44 | 4556017 IMACOINNUT
IMACOINNUT's picture

When I was a young kid 9 or 10, an old man spoke to me freq about life, he became what I would later call a mentor and probably the only one I've ever had. As an old farmer he supplemented his income working in a sausage plant, never owned a car  and always rode a bicycle. He said your life needs to be like a fistful of good dirt with shit keeping it potent and healthy, the better it clings together the better it is. He created new life every summer in his 2 acre farm and said to remain focused in life like a plant is focused on growth within itself.  He also said success in life is solely based on happiness from within and when choosing that fork in the road go for the one that will bring happiness for you and for everyone around you.

I asked about friends as I had none, my brothers were the leaders of the local youth, and he told me to have lots of friends by sharing your self with others, however, to never have a friend that is too close that it detracts from your personal identity. 

Much of this was retained subsciously for most of my life, only after years of self introspection, mostly with a little weed in private meditation did I recall these ideas.

Today I am very successful, not so much in money, but in the love of my family especially my wife, my friends at work in a very healthy work environment, and mostly in my love of life. The govt and society cannot change that because it is who I am. 

One more component people need to focus on is establishing a goal in life, many goals actually, ones not based on religion, govt, society, friends or even family but those that provide direction for a smooth flow towards death. A happy death if you will, as it is the most important goal.

For guidance in reaching that goal just reread the first part of my comment.

 

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 17:27 | 4556167 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"For guidance in reaching that goal just reread the first part of my comment."

Nice! Truth never needs to be defended and is always self evident.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 15:34 | 4555797 Seer
Seer's picture

Nothing new is ever written...  It has all been put down before.

"Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;
But do not dull thy palm with entertainment
Of each new-hatch'd, unfledged comrade."

Know trust.

"Do the best that you can in the place where you are, and be kind." - Scott Nearing

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 17:29 | 4556176 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"Nothing new is ever written...  It has all been put down before."

This is why I say I offer no original thought. Just original word construction expressing that thought.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 13:38 | 4555301 lasvegaspersona
lasvegaspersona's picture

Our actions are bordered by our desires and by the commitments we have made. Some are willing to violate their obligations to have 'what they desire'. Most of us will not. We stay by our promises and fulfil the trust expected. We do this at the sacrifice of many pleasures. Many of those who seem to be 'living the life and living large and free' are doing so knowing they have broken promises and sometimes lives. Some of these same people appear not to care. Perhaps they are truly happy even though the world around them is poorer.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 13:10 | 4555178 VWAndy
VWAndy's picture

Thanks for another good piece. In this day and age lying to ones self is so very easy. Its hard not to. But the less I lie to myself the better and more fulfilled and ok with it I become. I may not be able to stop the madnesses all around us. But at least my soul is whole.

 Interesting thing about being more honest with myself. Many times I can tell if the other person is lying to me or themselves. Making it prety easy to not only spot the cool aid but recognize thier particular flavor.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 13:44 | 4555324 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"Many times I can tell if the other person is lying to me or themselves."

Excellent insight. There is a difference and at times it can be huge.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 14:04 | 4555426 VWAndy
VWAndy's picture

Thats why I havent pushed many a tool down the stairs. The Krugster? yep him Id push.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:57 | 4555139 simplejustice
simplejustice's picture

Do you mean "self" the little self, or "Self" as the center of psyche.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 13:59 | 4555399 VWAndy
VWAndy's picture

To me its both because they become the same at the end kind of thing. I dont know how to explain it. One old friend said to me shortly before he passed. Ya got a good head on your shoulders the question is can ya use it well? At the end you will wish you had just done better. All I could say is he did fine by me. He passed away a few weeks later. Boy am I glad I said that right then.

Some things just cant be explaind very well.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 13:17 | 4555201 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I honestly don't know the difference between the little self and the center of psyche. Often even after we define words we are still not talking the same language because the words used to describe 'the word' carry different meanings with different people.

I highlight words in order to question their meaning as is generally accepted and understood.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 15:57 | 4555884 simplejustice
simplejustice's picture

 

I find this food for thought, I view the brain as the alchemical vessel ,inhabited by psyche and exposed to the various chemicals that are produced in house( hormones) as well as others introduced from outside. In this brew psyche "exists" in all its incarnations

 

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:35 | 4555045 tlnzz
tlnzz's picture

"personal sovereignty is a ‘State of Mind’,"

I too have crossed this Rubicon. It's an interesting adventure.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:16 | 4554977 suteibu
suteibu's picture

Life is a gift.  It is an adventure.  Fear keeps people from appreciating the gift and enjoying the adventure. 

It is not about questioning everything around you, it is about facing the fears that constrain you.  Question yourself.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 16:09 | 4555917 Ms No
Ms No's picture

Very true.  I am not big into woowoo new age stuff but it's an easy demonstrable fact that attitude and outlook effects everything.  All great leaders in business etc have professed this belief, if people want to poo poo that as coincidence that is their loss.  Believe in yourself, fear nothing, and take risk... and somehow everything works out.  Nothing wrong with money either, money in the hands of good people does good things. 

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:24 | 4555007 Seer
Seer's picture

My ex was afraid of everything.  Experiencing life was tiring, having to drag her ass into everything.  My priorities in a new partner/wife had at the top of the list "must be fearless."  Whereas I once had a mule for a wife I now have a horse (I have to spend a lot of energy trying to keep up with the current wife, but her enthusiasm for life is so great, and that she doesn't hold back on applying her own energies, that I don't feel any drain at all).

"Question yourself."

BRAVO!

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 20:27 | 4556780 Miffed Microbio...
Miffed Microbiologist's picture

I approached this problem a bit differently. I have a husband that is very uncomfortable with new things. Everything is looked upon with suspicion. I am the exact opposite. New things fascinate and energize me. I am constantly searching for the new and he loves the familiar. It gives him comfort.

One day I had his astrological chart done. He was amazed how it really described him. One of the key points was change for him represented a death. This really helped me to understand his outlook and empathize how my approach was so disconcerting. I completely revised my interactions to not be so threatening and he is thankful. Yes, I still love the thrill of change but I am cognizant not to present it in a way that bothers him. I give him a chance to "warm up" to things and not be offended if he doesn't want to dive in to a black pool of water. Just understanding someone's approach and not demanding they be like you sometimes is the medicine that can soothe the soul.

Your way is to find someone who was like you and met your requirements. This is certainly better than punishing one another for being inadequate for the other. However having a demand " must be fearless" may not always be possible. What is she got throat cancer and was frightened she may die? My husband said " no matter what happens, I will love and be with you until I die". I said " No matter what the circumstances I will love, honor and cherish you forever". We have no demands on one another. We are content.

Miffed;-)

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 13:26 | 4555232 blindman
blindman's picture

your wife sees this she just might fun off into the hills,
watch your tongue cowboy.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 15:24 | 4555765 Seer
Seer's picture

I think that the power of my wife is that she has no insecurities: unstoppable, demands (w/o statement) and gives respect.  I freely talk to her about all sort of things, even my ex: my ex lives far away and we're actually good friends to each other (life is short), we have lots of history of family, as well as, now that is, some similar lifestyles (rural folk).  My wife KNOWS that I worship her, as I know she does me: that's actually a "requirement" that I had, that I was seeking someone for mutual worship :-)  We're both older- no time for games...

The stongest bond is one based on trust.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 17:21 | 4556146 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"The stongest bond is one based on trust."

We are most vulnerable when we trust in that manner. It makes for the strongest bonds and the deepest wounds when violated.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 17:39 | 4556225 Seer
Seer's picture

That's love, is it not?

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 17:47 | 4556248 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Yes. It is.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:31 | 4555028 suteibu
suteibu's picture

Good for you. 

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 11:28 | 4554834 Reaper
Reaper's picture

I've never asked someone I met,“So….what do you do”? One's employment is likely from happenstance, necessity, or what was available. We are trained to pick from one of these choices. We may pick, but we needn't be confined. Why care for their respect, their consent, or their desires for you to validate their chains by allowing yourself to be chained? A good friend of mine, thirty years ago, summed up what confines most of us. He said, many times while at the office, he thought about Reaper, who was likely out sailing in a fresh breeze, or climbing a mountain, or cooking a great meal, or living his life now. That friend was waiting to retire to live free.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:19 | 4554983 Seer
Seer's picture

"I've never asked someone I met,“So….what do you do”?"

I have fun when people ask me that question.  I let them know that I DO a LOT of things! (I'm eclectic as hell.)  I prompt them to restate the question as asking what I do for revenue.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 16:09 | 4555918 juangrande
juangrande's picture

I usually answer that question with " as little as possible".

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:28 | 4555019 swmnguy
swmnguy's picture

That question is just a lazy way of offering up an opening to conversation.  Most people with full-time jobs spend most of their waking hours dealing with the job, so job-talk is often a low-risk avenue of discussion.  It's sort of like asking, "So, how 'bout them [local sports team name]?"

What's more fun is to ask people, "So, what do you think is interesting?"  People often have a really hard time at first with that question, but it leads to a much more interesting conversation once they engage.  It can be very telling to see how long that conversation goes on before you find out what the other person does for money.  Asking right out, "So, what do you do for money?" sometimes leads to interesting places, too.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 13:41 | 4555310 Seer
Seer's picture

"So, what do you think is interesting?"

Sometimes I'm afraid to ask that question (for fear of subjecting myself to utter dismay)! :-)

The question of "what do you do for revenue" tends to steer people away from the topic, which is a way of steering it toward something more interesting.

Anyway, great dialogue!

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 11:05 | 4554762 Shad_ow
Shad_ow's picture

This piece is especially timely considering all we are facing with the changes being made in government and society.  We can benefit by looking inward and deciding what makes us happy, letting go of unncessary stuff and people who make negative impacts on our lives.  Removing the clutter and chaos makes it much easier to answer the questions you pose.  What direction do I want to take in my life?  Today's answer is so different than it was a few years ago for most of us.

Thank you CD for your inspiration and gentle prodding to be self aware and responsible.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 11:25 | 4554817 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"Thank you CD for your inspiration and gentle prodding to be self aware and responsible."

Sometimes I wish I would listen more carefully to my own prodding. :)

I suspect the biggest con of them all is the idea, the 'belief', that once we have learned something we are done learning in that area. Or that to reassess, and then change your mind, your 'belief', is a sign of weakness or indecision. That other than certain ever changing 'facts', once we reach a certain ago of 'maturity' we are done growing, finished learning, and now it's just a matter of application.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:14 | 4554970 Seer
Seer's picture

CD, we should all stand as inspirations.

The world "belief" is kind of interesting.  Maybe we should interpret more as it's two syllables?  "BE" and "LIEF."  "LIEF" is old English for "love."

I've come to appreciate the corporate slogan from Nike: "Just Do It."  I can readily take this and toss out all that the corporate entitiy puts behind it, thank you very much!

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 11:22 | 4554811 USA USA
USA USA's picture

Sorry but it is near impossible to let go of many things that are impacting our lives when they are directed and controlled by

a completly destructive and evil goverment intent in killing our way of life and the founding principals of this country.

Letting go in this regard is surrendering to evil. It must be fought or we are nothing but sheep.

The Jews in WW II probably "let go" and look what happened to them.

I can "let go" some ass hole that cuts me off or rides my bumper, but there are limit of "lettin go"

Go climb a mountain, live like Buddah and let us know how that works out!

 

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:09 | 4554953 Seer
Seer's picture

"The Jews in WW II probably "let go" and look what happened to them."

The story, which there are many similar but this one is pretty well known and popular, serves up a VERY interesting question, and that question is: Why did some people flee and others not?

NOTE: The movie Out Of Africa seemed to probe this issue.

I could just as readily say that the Jews in WWII that escaped Nazism DID "let go," they let go of their homes, relatives, friends and surroundings.  My view is that those that didn't "let go" stayed and paid the consequence.

That said, one should do according to what one's energy is best suited to do.  I'm an advocate for farming, yet I know that most folks my age, and many far younger, not only couldn't physically do what I do, but they are mentally unable to- their "mental" just won't route the energy: whether this is something that can/should be "fixed" is not my concern.

"there are limit of "lettin go""

It's under each's control.  My sister drilled the point into my head that each is responsible for how they feel, that no one can MAKE you feel a given way: yes, people can present different energy flows that can either combine or detract from yours, but you're the captain of your ship and you can steer your mind to safe harbours (think of folks that have survived years in solitary confinement- they lived not because they could get back at anyone, they lived because they were the total masters of their ship).

Balance is good.  I have been pretty well balanced for a while now, after surrounding myself with compatible energies (wife, dog, farm...).  I can still cuss at all the "idiots" out there (I liken it to conjuring up Karmic forces); and, I can just plop down on the grass alongside my dog and marvel at the scenery.

I've got a short book that has, IMO, the best title ever: Want What You Have. (I view "have" as meaning what one is arranged with/charged with caring for rather than as possession.)

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 12:38 | 4555049 swmnguy
swmnguy's picture

I agree wholeheartedly with your take on the Jews of Europe, and who did and didn't "Let Go."

There's a very malicious trend in pro-corporate pop psychology that equates "Letting Go" with "Aquiescing to Authoritarianism."  In my last "job-job," over a decade ago, I had a new boss come in and make us all read, "Who Moved My Cheese?"  Of course we all called it, "Who Cut The Cheese," but I actually found the little book very evil and disturbing.  Taking things as they come and responding is not the same as passive fatalism in the face of authority.

Regarding, "Who Moved My Cheese?", my response at the time was that I much preferred Camus' "The Myth of Sisyphus," as it was much shorter and concerned the question of how an individual can be autonomous and happy in the face of circumstances outside his control.  Far more interesting than a parable about mice in a lab maze, learning to accept whatever mental construct some abstracted authority structure wants them to adopt.

As a matter of fact, it was that interaction that finally forced me to confront my growing unease with employment at all.  I realized the employer/employee relationship was turning me into an infant, and imposing a really dysfunctional parental role on my employer.  Once I realized that, it was like realizing the distinguished Transylvanian Count is actually a vampire; you can't unsee it and you can't act the same way having seen it, so you have to get the heck out of Dodge while you still can.

To "Let Go" actually means to get very honest and specific with yourself about what you can and cannot control, and to make sure you take control of the things you can control, and remain observant about those things you can't.  It's really hard to do at first, and scary.  But eventually it becomes impossible to even think another way, because it's the only way that makes any sense and doesn't lead to immobilizing frustration and dysfunction.  It's not coincidental that there are so many efforts to divert attention from true "Letting Go" in favor of that fatalistic submission to authority.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 17:48 | 4556135 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"I realized the employer/employee relationship was turning me into an infant, and imposing a really dysfunctional parental role on my employer."

Any time we empower someone (or something) else we dis-empower ourselves.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 15:37 | 4555811 Seer
Seer's picture

Excellent!  Thanks for sharing!

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 11:04 | 4554756 blindman
blindman's picture

John Cale - Dying On The Vine (1985)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOhVEtTsU4I
.
" this seminar is about a very sticky problem.
the problem to which the buddha primarily addressed
himself which is that of agony, suffering.
but before we get into that we have to be clear
about certain basics. and these basics have to do not so much
with concepts and ideas as to do with a state of mind.
you could call it also a state of feeling, a state of sensation,
a state of consciousness ..." a.w.
.
Alan Watts - Differentiation of consciousness
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmZGjOzdaO8
.

Sun, 03/16/2014 - 11:47 | 4554890 Seer
Seer's picture

Yes, it's about energy...

Most animals are vastly more sensitive to minute changes than are humans.

Humans are becoming more and more desensitized.

The more we think the less we feel.  Rather, the less we're in tune to NOW.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!