Wednesday, 23 September 2020
Saturday, 19 September 2020
“If it’s too good to be true, it probably is.” Agenda Based Social Doctrine
It’s a social meme for creating disfunctional people and relationships. Belief in this is not wisdom, it is setting yourself up for fail. It means when you have it good you reject it and opt for second best. It prevents the development of a certain ability based on acceptance and establishing solidity in that higher level.
If you have the ability, you can connect to that higher level. We all deserve happiness. We are able to make the right person happy because that naturally happens until we block it, turn away from it, create a lie to undermine the purity which is the strength of a quality relationship.
Not everyone is dysfunctional in that way. Some people accept the happiness and accept living life at that higher level of stability. It’s about love and our ability to trust others and ourselves. To choose to connect at that level.
The first step in that sort of intimacy is to raise awareness of it. As a community we are mentally polluted with memes which control our attitudes and behaviour. Those who do not give in to the delusion of doubt are a different type of people to those who habitually do. To recover permanently would be good.
It’s simple. We connect to the heart as the centre of the universe instead of to the reptilian brain and it’s paranoid need to hide, control and judge, especially to judge. Instead we simple let go and flow with the ever changing tide of universal energies. Take a deep breath and release, the stress and judgement. The issue blows away and is forgotten.
What’s left is critical choice from a higher perception.
“No one is responsible for your happiness but you.” Will Smith
Beliefs become hardwired as our way of thinking. They become rigid absolutes. This is unhealthy for us.
Why is it one person believes one thing, a different person please a different thing? The beliefs are software not absolutes. They are opinion, not truths. Humans commonly mistake beliefs for truths and act accordingly. They control our behaviour.
So, if people are full up of nonsense but believe it, they behave like idiots. If people are full up of sense and believe it, they behave sane.
To be sensitive is to be open and receptive to many different ideas, without necessarily having developed an ability to critically judge between fact and fantasy, right and wrong, good and bad, sense and nonsense, truth and delusions. Such people are vulnerable.
In my 30+ years of counselling, I would say this includes most people to such an extent that the ones who are an exception of the rule are notable because they stand out.
I put them into two categories, those who rigidly will not back down and yet are full of nonsense versus those who rigidly will not back down because they are aligned with the truth.
You have to know truth to be able to recognise it in other people that’s a huge part of the problem, as soon as you accept and believe in and mistake a lie as a truth you are delusional.
The ability to tell the difference between a lie in the truth begins with questioning everything instead of unquestioningly accepting information and mistaking it as truth, believing in it.
The second factor which helps to develop the ability to tell the difference between a lie in the truth is you’re never lie.
Again, the factor of delusion plays its part because unquestioningly believe in a thing to be true and acting accordingly, without identifying if it is true or not, undermines our ability to tell the truth.
A simple board game.
The board game grid is 11 squares by 11 squares. The game last for 10 rounds. You begin in the centre of the board at one edge. Opposite you is the finish line which is called the truth. To your left and you’re right are the sides of the game board which are called delusion. Every turn you move one step. If you have chosen to stay aligned with truth you move one step forward towards truth. Any other choice you move sideways instead of forwards. If, by the end of the game, you are still floating around somewhere in the board and have not cross the finish line and left the edge of the board, you are living in confusion and delusion.
In real life we do not have ten turns to assess the truth and align with it, we have one and it is continuous. Sadly, the vast majority of people are floating around in a sea of delusion, because they are not aligned to truth.
Any opinion is a belief not a truth. Therefore to mistake it for truth is delusional. Check your belief structure. Is your self doubt based on truth or delusion? If you identify that your self-doubt is based on delusion, reassess yourself. Say out loud: “I choose to no longer in power this delusion because it does not serve the truth.”
First step of this is to accept and this is very often the most difficult thing to do.
“I accept that I was wrong up until this moment. As of now I go forward having consciously decided to align with truth.”
“I am not a piece of scum. I am worthy.”
“Everybody makes mistakes so we can learn from them, it does not make us bad people.”
I’m sure you have the imagination to invent whatever positive self talk is relevant to your circumstances.
Because of this (above), it means anything anyone says is not immediately by default the truth. It is their opinion. Therefore it is probable that it is a delusion.
If someone says (anything at all), do you:
a. Immediately be convinced it is the truth without questioning it?
b. Reject it as bullcrap?
c. Assess it to identify if it is truth or belief, if it is opinion, delusion, nonsense.
d. Decide which, a b or c, is most relevant, depending on the circumstances.
The ability to critically judge which category a thing is, is a life skill.
The ability to reject anything which is not truth, is a life skill.
Most people do not develop it very strong because most people are not trained to think clearly.
People accept delusions and suffer the consequences.
You don’t have to be delusional. You get to choose who you are, how you react to other people’s statements of opinion.
Monday, 14 September 2020
The Quest for Relevance
Through thousands of generations, throughout a multitude of different cultures, the Quest for Relevance has revealed to us an ineffable wisdom.
The Purposeful Dialogue
and Three Critical Questions
1 : The Purposeful Dialogue
Our way of life is transitory.
Everything we do is temporary, with exception of carving stone, planting trees and making children. Even then, there are no guarantees.
People who do not carve stone, plant trees and/or make children are not part of the Human continuum. They’re part of the augmentation to provide for the continuum or they are vampires upon it.
Most of the time most of us are not going to be carving stone, planting trees or making babies.
2 : The Three Critical Questions
Of all of the impermanent things it is possible for us to do: what is worth doing?
After great deliberation it was generally understood there to be one concept which answered this question:
Emotional, Mental, Physical, Spiritual.
What activities accomplish this?
After great deliberation it was necessarily asked: Is there anything at all outside of this which is worth doing?
3 : The Fourth Awareness
After great deliberation it was necessarily asked; is there any other thing not covered by these responses, which we have forgotten to be aware of?
To date, despite various movements representing short-lived attempts to do so, there has been no solid reply to the fourth critical question (and very few to the third).
Many claim it to be irrelevant.
Many others agree that despite it being apparently unanswerable, the Dilemma of Unknowable Alternative is the most necessary and important of them all.
Many others cannot distinguish the nature of any difference between the third and fourth.
Many others explain it is imperative to understand the difference between the third and fourth.
4 : A Promoted Discourse (insert)
A structured logical attempt to elucidate on the Critical Questions.
“To aspire to higher things”
“For the sake of (it)” ‘it’ being in this case, higher things - for the sake of higher things.
“To bring you or others satisfaction.”
“Aspiration is satisfaction.”
“Even if it is unobtainable or unobtained?”
“The quest for relevance includes the quest for satisfaction regardless of successful attainment.”
“What of those who pursue unsatisfactory purpose? To not aspire. To aspire toward degradation.”
“Are they relevant? Are they doing things worth doing?”
“Yes, Yes. Yes, No. No, Yes. No, No. These are the four castes of possible exemptions, those who pursue unsatisfactory purpose.
Yes, Yes. Relevant and Worthy. If they are relevant and worthy, they are not exempt.
Yes, No. Relevant and Unworthy. If they are relevant they are also necessarily worthy. They are not exempt. The concept is self-defeating. It does not exist. It is delusional to establish grounding here.
No, Yes. Irrelevant and Worthy. If they are worthy they are also necessarily relevant. They are not exempt. The concept is self-defeating. It does not exist. It is delusional to establish grounding here.
No, No. Irrelevant and unworthy. This is the only group who answer the third critical question in a meaningful albeit negative way. Those who pursue activities which are neither relevant nor worthy do exist. Can their work be permanent? Can this lead us to answer the fourth question?”
“Answering each question either reveals it to have already been answered or that it creates more questions. It is a system which folds upon itself: ultimately all questions have already been answered, or they result in the same conclusion, a question which creates more questions, all of which have already been answered with the exception of the one question which creates more questions.”
“Have you come to a place in your approach where there are no longer any questions which have not already been answered, do not create more questions?”
“That place exists?”
“In many different guises. It is only the place where the question cannot be answered and requires more questions which is of concern to those who explore the third and fourth critical questions.”
3 Is there anything outside of satisfaction worth doing?
4 Is there anything outside our rationale which we have overlooked?
“I do not enjoy the work I do.”
“Does it creates results worth doing?”
“No. It is neither relevant nor worthy.”
“Then you are a fool to continue doing it.”
“That is why I must continue doing it. To discover relevance of irrelevancy. To answer the fourth critical question. That a person enacts an irrelevant and unworthy task, the futility, creates its own purpose, the purpose of its being.”
“You thus have aspiration. You have discovered satisfaction. It is relevant and worthy. You are not a fool.”
“Were I to cease to do it?”
“That would be preferable.”
“Is there anything at all so futile as to be not contain this lesson of awareness?
“That is why we ask these questions. That is their purpose. You have simply rephrased and therefore understood the third and fourth critical questions.”
“Were I to do nothing at all?”
“Only one who has succeeded at that can knowingly answer.”
5 : Concision (insert)
The Purposeful Dialogue
The Three Critical Questions
The Dilemma Unknown
The Promoted Discourse
What is worth doing?
What activities accomplish this?
Is there anything outside of this worth doing?
Is there anything else to be aware of?
Our task is to posit debate regarding the information presented as response to the Quest for Relevance. It is advised to tackle the topic one step at a time. It is also encouraged that any innovation on the individuals part be fully explored.
6 : Undisclosed Evolution (insert)
Is it Useful?
Is it Accountable?
Is it necessary for it to be (useful, accountable)?
If it exists it serves purpose, it is relevant.
If it exists yet is unaccountable, it exists, it serves purpose.
Are today’s interpretations what was originally intended?
Do we suffer from cognitive bias?
These questions are why the fourth critical question exists, to raise our awareness of such factors.
All of these questions have already been integrated into the basic model.
7 : The Golden Standard (insert)
“By what criteria do we ascertain Relevance?”
“That, respected and enlightened one, is the Golden Question.”
“Does relevance necessarily have to be permanent? The answer is No, because we ourselves are not permanent. Only by our actions can we strive for permanence, by carving stone, planting trees or making children. This does not ipso facto mean we are ourselves irrelevant. Thus, those who do not carve stone, plant trees or make babies, are also not ipso facto irrelevant. Those are not the only criteria by which we evaluate relevancy. We also respect augmentation of the human continuum to have relevance.”
“So the only irrelevant and unworthy caste are the vampiric who exploit the human continuum without augmenting it?”
“It is possible they also may have relevancy and worth, albeit relative. Relevancy is relative. It is about how we relate a thing to another. How we relate between things. Thus we must establish polarised or yet more complicated poly-optional parameters between things to establish weight worth.”
“Who it is more useful to defines its respective worth. A lake owner requires water less than a desert nomad. To the lake owner water falls from the skies to fill his lake, water is everywhere, it is almost worthless. To the desert nomad water is rare and sacred, worth more than gold and perhaps more than life itself.”
“We all need water.”
“Thus it has irrefutable worth. Do we all need gold?”
“Most people never encounter it.”
“Are they any less for never encountering it?”
“Then gold is worth significantly less than water.”
“Not to the owner of a gold mine in a desert.”
“Now you see it. Worth is relative. Relevance is relative. Relativity is about relevancy. Revelation is elevation, it inherently has value.”
“Insight and education.”
“Intuition and indoctrination.”
“Polarised parts of the same whole.”
“A dynamic. There is always a scale system between polarities, by which to gauge value. In its simplest form, five stages of transition. Pure left, bias left, perfect balance, bias right, pure right.”
“It could be left, centre, right.”
“We require versatility to assess complexity. Halfway between the oasis and the sea there is sand. Travel the opposite direction, halfway between the oasis and the sea there is sand. Without the sand there is no oasis, only a river connecting the left sea to the right sea.”
These pages are inserts from the Tau of the SpaceWays, addendum & additional notes.
Timeline 1 - safe
At every moment, accountable humans consciously choose the optimal path for species survival and evolution.
Timeline 2 - collapse
All people lost in the fallout of unaccountable people, collectively experiencing the horrors of planetary collapse, narcissistic destruction and death.
Timeline 3 - toxicity
Unaccountable people consciously creating the horrors of planetary collapse, narcissistic destruction and death, at every opportunity.
The difference between these three possible Timelines has one factor:
(including holding others accountable).
Accountability for Self & self-action.
Accountability for safeguarding others.
Accountability for the environment.
The environment, which supports us and provides us with life. (air, water, food, clothes, shelter, warmth).
Accountability is Responsibility
Responsibility is Respectability