A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Kayla
Posts: 1210
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 6:31 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Kayla » Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:51 pm

Lacewing wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:32 am
Nick_A wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:01 am
Who is cutting off the feminine more: men or the feminists?
Not really sure what difference that makes. Who has been around longer? My issue is with MEN telling WOMEN that they are inferior. That has been going on for a very long time. I see feminism as an outcome of that distortion and aggression... so it seems that BLAMING feminism NOW is simply another way of such MEN continuing their march across the wastelands created by male egos and ignorance. :D

Male...female...doesn't really matter. We're sacred beings who suffer the consequences of our games.
it is weird how men focus on the crazy within feminism (like any ideology it has crazies) - and yet when it comes to hatred for the opposite sex, the craziest most radical womens studies professor does not come even close to a bunch of ordinary drunk frat bros.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Lacewing » Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:48 am

Kayla wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:51 pm
it is weird how men focus on the crazy within feminism (like any ideology it has crazies) - and yet when it comes to hatred for the opposite sex, the craziest most radical womens studies professor does not come even close to a bunch of ordinary drunk frat bros.
A lot of men appear to think that women are crazy sleazy witches... especially when the men can't control them. Many men seem threatened and angry about the power that women have -- it's a power that's expressed differently than the aggressive male display, and it's less obvious and harder for men to figure out. Whereas men are more focused on the physical nature of war... women seem more focused on mental strategy. Physical might vs. mental might. And such men want to destroy such a potent/effective force... yet they desire the physicality of women. So (perhaps) they try to destroy spirit... crush the feminine... dominate her... disarm her and make her their possession. And then they are aghast when women evolve to out-maneuver that oppressive path.

Simply, the goddess is not pleased and she will find/make her own way. :)

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Lacewing » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:11 am

Nick_A wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:07 pm
If the essence of Man originated exclusively on the earth as animal Man then the evolution of Man is the cycle of dust to dust.
Well, the BODY becomes dust. What can you really understand of "essence" beyond what you (or anyone) imagine/feel?
Nick_A wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:07 pm
If however man is dual natured having a higher part that involved from above, the seed of the soul, conscious evolution is the maturation of and return to the source of this higher part.
Why would we need to return to where we come from? Why wouldn't we keep exploring? And are we ever really going anywhere or being anything other than what/where we completely are?
Nick_A wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:07 pm
Man has the obligation to nurture this seed which cannot be done through lies. The seed of the soul feeds on truth.
So, here's one of your ideals, yes? And you endeavor to identify truth vs. lies, and that this needs to be done for some obligated reason you imagine. You find value in identifying this purpose for your life. But why would a human think that they understand and need to fix that which is expanding and evolving in a much broader sense naturally? Why would a human think that they have any freakin' CLUE as to what is going on and why? What is this NEED to FIX as opposed to APPRECIATE? It's the ego at work, yes? Knowing, fixing, controlling...and when you die, what have you changed? What if you spend your time LOVING instead? Wouldn't the Universe appreciate and reward THAT response to its magnificent creative energy? :lol:

Nick_A
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Nick_A » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:28 am

From "The Red Virgin": A Poem of Simone Weil by Stephanie Strickland which won the Brittingham Prize in Poetry in 1993.
"Weil came to her philosophical and religious ideas by a path that included elite university training, factory work, potato digging, harvest in the vineyards, teaching philosophy to adolescent women, partisanship in trade unions, anarchistic Socialism, pacifism, rejection of pacifism, a conversion experience that did not lead her to joining ... a religion, exile in New York City, and employment by De Gaulle's government-in-exile in London.

Weil used her body as a tool as well as a weapon. She threw herself under the wheels of the same issues women are starving for answers to today: issues of hunger, violence, exclusion, betrayal of the the body, inability to be heard, and self-hate. ...

"Weil, our shrewdest political observer since Machiavelli, was never deceived by the glamor of power, and she committed herself to resisting force in whatever guise. More 'prophet' than 'saint,' more 'wise woman' than either, she bore a particular kind of bodily knowledge that the Western tradition cannot absorb. Simone Weil belongs to a world culture, still to be formed, where the voices of multiple classes, castes, races, genders, ethnicities, nationalities, and religions, can be respected. To achieve this culture is an impossible task, but, as Weil would remind us, not on that account to be forsaken.

Today we look to Weil for hope, for meditation, for the bridge a body makes. She knew that the truth had been 'taken captive,' and that we must 'seek at greater depth our own source,' because power destroys the past, the past with its treasures of alternative ideals that stand in judgment on the present."
Simone wasn't a feminist simply because she wasn't fighting for equality. She was striving to be real - a largely forgotten aspiration

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Lacewing » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:40 am

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:28 am
From "The Red Virgin": A Poem of Simone Weil by Stephanie Strickland which won the Brittingham Prize in Poetry in 1993.
Do you have any direct answers to the questions I posed to you, Nick?

Nick_A
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Nick_A » Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am

Lacewing wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:40 am
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:28 am
From "The Red Virgin": A Poem of Simone Weil by Stephanie Strickland which won the Brittingham Prize in Poetry in 1993.
Do you have any direct answers to the questions I posed to you, Nick?
Well, the BODY becomes dust. What can you really understand of "essence" beyond what you (or anyone) imagine/feel?
Yes, a person can verify through self knowledge if they are ONE having inner unity or if they are a plurality beginning with mind, body, and emotions.

A person can experience that their consciousness can observe their mechanical reactions. A person can experience that the lack of inner unity puts us in opposition to ourselves.
Why would we need to return to where we come from? Why wouldn't we keep exploring? And are we ever really going anywhere or being anything other than what/where we completely are?
Everything in the universe is either on the vertical path of the evolution of its being moving closer to our source or involution, moving further down into creation and away from our source.

You are describing adaptation, not evolution. Man is adapting to increased knowledge and spreading out as you suggest. The problem is that the being of Man has become corrupt over time. Plato describes us as a sick deformed horse in the Chariot analogy. If we do live and function in a corrupt state it is obvious that as we continue to adapt to new knowledge it must inevitably lead to our own demise. We will experience the result of what we collectively are. That is why people like Jacob Needleman refer so often to the importance of working on the quality of our being. Without the growth of our being keeping up with our expanded knowledge I don’t see how our species can survive.
So, here's one of your ideals, yes? And you endeavor to identify truth vs. lies, and that this needs to be done for some obligated reason you imagine. You find value in identifying this purpose for your life. But why would a human think that they understand and need to fix that which is expanding and evolving in a much broader sense naturally? Why would a human think that they have any freakin' CLUE as to what is going on and why? What is this NEED to FIX as opposed to APPRECIATE? It's the ego at work, yes? Knowing, fixing, controlling...and when you die, what have you changed? What if you spend your time LOVING instead? Wouldn't the Universe appreciate and reward THAT response to its magnificent creative energy?
The truth of our being is unnecessary for life in Plato’s cave which sustains itself through imagination. The experiencing truth is only essential for the seed of the soul which has the potential to reconcile above and below and our evolutionary potential.

From Jacob Needleman’s book “Lost Christianity:
What we need to learn is that merely to look at things as they are with bare attention can be a religious act.

The principal power of the soul, which defines its real nature, is a gathered attention that is directed simultaneously toward the spirit and the body. This is attention of the heart, and this is the principal mediating, harmonizing power of the soul. The mediating attention of the heart is spontaneously activated in the state of profound self-questioning. God can only speak to the soul, Father Sylvan writes, and only when the soul exists. But the soul of man only exists for a moment, as long as it takes for the question to appear and disappear…………………….

……….Finally, a truly Christian life is possible only for an individual in whom the process of soul-making has gone past a certain point. Such individuals are rare; but only they are capable of altruism in the strictly spiritual sense. In Fr. Sylvan’s language, the soul begins to radiate. He writes: God created Adam as the intermediate. The intermediate is the beginning, but for me the beginning is the goal.
In short, the soul is not a fixed entity. According to Fr. Sylvan it is a movement, that begins whenever a man or woman experiences the psychological pain of contradiction. It is an actual energy, but one that is only at some beginning stage of its development and action. Every day, every more or less average individual experiences the appearance of this energy in its most embryonic stage. Whenever there is pain or contradiction, this energy of the soul is released or activated. Lost Christianity is the lost or forgotten power of man or woman to extract the pure energy of the soul from the experiences that make up his or her life. This possibility is distinct only in the most vivid or painful moments of our ordinary lives, but it can be discovered in all experiences if one knows how to seek it.
Certain powerful experiences are often accompanied by the sensation of presence, and attention appears that is simultaneously open to a higher, freer mind or spirit, and to all the perceptions, sensations and emotions that constitute our ordinary self. One feels both separate and engaged in a new and entirely extraordinary way. One experiences “I am.” This is the soul in its inception.
The person with a sincere religious calling is emotionally unsatisfied with expanding out as if on a horizontal plane into the universe.They seek the inner vertical path of the growth of being which connects the lower with the higher. They are willing to experience the truth of themselves in order to have this experience.

Some rare people become accomplished on the horizontal plane of science and also begin to develop inwardly along the vertical line of being to acquire a human perspective. These are people truly human and worth knowing.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Lacewing » Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:04 am

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
a person can verify through self knowledge if they are ONE having inner unity or if they are a plurality beginning with mind, body, and emotions.
I thing these are fanciful words that don't really clearly express much. Isn't everything that a person sees, thinks, feels, experiences filtered through the limits of human perspective? Even if someone has studied or delved deeply into self-inquiry or spiritual openness... it is still an experience through the limited human perspective. Some people may attain great heights of awareness, beyond the more common noisy levels, but they are still in human form, and to deny that (and pretend to be beyond humans) is a great self-rejection.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
A person can experience that their consciousness can observe their mechanical reactions.
Sure.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
A person can experience that the lack of inner unity puts us in opposition to ourselves.
Unity with what? Unity suggests there's also separation. That's a religious mindset. I think more in terms of "balance". When we are out of balance -- noisy, untruthful, extreme -- then we don't attain our highest/best potential, and we draw more of that disruption to ourselves.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
Everything in the universe is either on the vertical path of the evolution of its being moving closer to our source or involution, moving further down into creation and away from our source.
Please explain to me the logic of: evolution as something's movement toward its source. Why would something evolve BACK to its source/origin? How is that EVOLVING?
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
You are describing adaptation, not evolution.
No, I'm not.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
The problem is that the being of Man has become corrupt over time.
Many people do NOT agree or think this way. Your perspective, and the perspective of those you've chosen to emulate, is not the final word on ultimate truth. For example, consider that humankind is just what it is. Like anything, it can evolve in destructive ways, and wipe itself out...again and again. Why do you assign some big spiritual "undoing" to that? Why not love it for what it is? Do you love a child who is foolishly destructive? Do you think "adult" humans are really any different? How could the evolution/mis-deads of humans cause them to be separated from their "source"? Are they that much more powerful than their source? IT MAKES NO SENSE, NICK!

Humans have always made up fanciful stories to exalt and comfort themselves, and condemn others.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
That is why people like Jacob Needleman refer so often to the importance of working on the quality of our being. Without the growth of our being keeping up with our expanded knowledge I don’t see how our species can survive.
Agreed. But that doesn't mean we're separated from a source. There are many creations that arise and fall. It just seems to be nature, trying everything out. I don't mind being a being who strives to improve the quality of my being while ALSO being a limited human on the stage of life. It's beautiful.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
The truth of our being is unnecessary for life in Plato’s cave which sustains itself through imagination. The experiencing truth is only essential for the seed of the soul which has the potential to reconcile above and below and our evolutionary potential.
So, where have you got to, Nick? After all of your talking, where do you see yourself on this path, and how has it changed the quality of your life? Is this forum the destination or fertile ground for people who are focused on truth and the seed of the soul? That doesn't sound right. I think doing it wouldn't require so much talking about it... especially on this hodge-podge platform. Talking about it seems more like ego.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
From Jacob Needleman’s book “Lost Christianity:
What we need to learn is that merely to look at things as they are with bare attention can be a religious act.
Sure... but I would use the word "spiritual" not "religious".
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
The person with a sincere religious calling is emotionally unsatisfied with expanding out as if on a horizontal plane into the universe.They seek the inner vertical path of the growth of being which connects the lower with the higher.
Why would a path out into the universe be horizontal? Why wouldn't it be in all directions? Such words/concepts really distort and limit the possibilities, Nick. And I think that's manipulative. I don't care who has said it, and how important anyone thinks they are. We must inquire for ourselves! No one has more of a line on ultimate truth. Yet MANY produce fanciful distortions for one reason or another.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:31 am
Some rare people become accomplished on the horizontal plane of science and also begin to develop inwardly along the vertical line of being to acquire a human perspective. These are people truly human and worth knowing.
Everyone is truly human and worth knowing. Again with your divisions and separations... which, if I may suggest, is very unspiritual. Why wouldn't spirit encompass all? Only man superficially divides, in order to judge, control, own, etc.

Nick, I think you mix genuinely insightful statements with nonsense fanciful concepts, which creates a mangled brew of self- justification and purpose for you. It's no different than any other religious zealot who insists to know the truth. For me, the tell-tale sign of nonsense is the specific concepts and "rules". I just don't think that ANYTHING has to be so specific! That's MAN talking! :wink:

Nick_A
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Nick_A » Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm

Lacewing
I thing these are fanciful words that don't really clearly express much. Isn't everything that a person sees, thinks, feels, experiences filtered through the limits of human perspective?
Yes it is their perspective but is that a human perspective. Is an interpretation the real thing. If everyone has different opinions by definition they lack the truth a conscious human perspective is capable of. A seeker of truth knows they are also a victim of this same self deception so seek to learn why it is so and if they can awaken from this self deception sometimes referred to as “sleep.”
Unity with what? Unity suggests there's also separation. That's a religious mindset. I think more in terms of "balance". When we are out of balance -- noisy, untruthful, extreme -- then we don't attain our highest/best potential, and we draw more of that disruption to ourselves.
An interesting discussion. Can we verify if we have the tripartite soul as described by Plato or are we inner unity which just expresses itself differently at different times. I have verified sufficiently for me that I am a tripartite soul. I have witnessed how my intentional aims are countered by my habitual appetites.

https://philosophycourse.info/platosite/3schart.html
Sometimes Plato's division of the psyche into its three main elements can be easily misunderstood. Some who read about it for the first time think it is the same as Freud's division of the psyche into the ego (das Ich), id (das Es), and superego (das Über-Ich), but it isn't the same as Freud's division. Others think it's the same as the old adult-parent-child division, but it's not that either. Nor is it the same as the conscious-subconscious-supraconscious division.
Plato's identification of these three distinct elements of a person's inner life is unique, and can be validated by directly turning inward to one's own experience of the self.
Plato's three elements of the psyche are
1. The appetites, which includes all our myriad desires for various pleasures, comforts, physical satisfactions, and bodily ease. There are so many of these appetites that Plato does not bother to enumerate them, but he does note that they can often be in conflict even with each other. This element of the soul is represented by the ugly black horse on the left.
2. The spirited, or hot-blooded, part, i.e., the part that gets angry when it perceives (for example) an injustice being done. This is the part of us that loves to face and overcome great challenges, the part that can steel itself to adversity, and that loves victory, winning, challenge, and honor. (Note that Plato's use of the term "spirited" here is not the same as "spiritual." He means "spirited" in the same sense that we speak of a high-spirited horse, for example, one with lots of energy and power.) This element of the soul is represented by the noble white horse on the right.
3. The mind (nous), our conscious awareness, is represented by the charioteer who is guiding (or who at least should be guiding) the horses and chariot. This is the part of us that thinks, analyzes, looks ahead, rationally weighs options, and tries to gauge what is best and truest overall……………….
Please explain to me the logic of: evolution as something's movement toward its source. Why would something evolve BACK to its source/origin? How is that EVOLVING?
Actually it is the same IMO. Consider the idea as a kalpa described in the East
Time in Buddhist cosmology is measured in kalpas. Originally, a kalpa was considered to be 4,320,000 years. Buddhist scholars expanded it with a metaphor: rub a one-mile cube of rock once every hundred years with a piece of silk, until the rock is worn away -- and a kalpa still hasn’t passed! During a kalpa, the world comes into being, exists, is destroyed, and a period of emptiness ensues. Then it all starts again.
Nothing can have as its destination anything other than its origin. The contrary idea, the idea of progress, is poison. Simone Weil ...
This is one of these ideas that is difficult to explain but once a person experiences it, it can create an “aha” moment. Progress is the return to the origin of the cycle of time.
Many people do NOT agree or think this way. Your perspective, and the perspective of those you've chosen to emulate, is not the final word on ultimate truth. For example, consider that humankind is just what it is. Like anything, it can evolve in destructive ways, and wipe itself out...again and again. Why do you assign some big spiritual "undoing" to that? Why not love it for what it is? Do you love a child who is foolishly destructive? Do you think "adult" humans are really any different? How could the evolution/mis-deads of humans cause them to be separated from their "source"? Are they that much more powerful than their source? IT MAKES NO SENSE, NICK!
Consider the difference between evolution and adaptation as depicted by the ancient symbol of the cross. Its horizontal line is the line of linear time. It connects before and after. Everything adapts along this line. The vertical line of the cross intersects the horizontal line. Where the horizontal line depicts the span of linear time the vertical line depicts the quality of the moment: the timeless “now.” Evolution takes place along the vertical quality of now and defined by its distance from the source as described in the Great Chain of Being.

Animal man is no more capable of conscious evolution than a dog. Both are creatures of reaction. Man has the potential to become a conscious being. It is referred to as awakening which IMO is the meaning of Christian rebirth. I’m not asking you to believe it but just explaining the rational behind the religious calling much like the moth is attracted to the light..

The problem isn’t misdeeds which are just the natural expressions of the human condition. The problem is the human condition itself. Secular religion makes the mistake of trying to suppress it which is real spirit killer. The key is to see it for what it is, appreciate its dynamics, and make the conscious efforts to free oneself from this unnatural slavery we find ourselves in.
Agreed. But that doesn't mean we're separated from a source. There are many creations that arise and fall. It just seems to be nature, trying everything out. I don't mind being a being who strives to improve the quality of my being while ALSO being a limited human on the stage of life. It's beautiful.
The “we” you refer doesn’t exist. We are a plurality and all sides of our plurality claim to be I. We are connected to our source as a necessity serving a cosmic purpose much like the rest of organic life on earth does moving in cycles. The question is if Man is capable of more than a mechanical necessity and serve a conscious purpose?
So, where have you got to, Nick? After all of your talking, where do you see yourself on this path, and how has it changed the quality of your life? Is this forum the destination or fertile ground for people who are focused on truth and the seed of the soul? That doesn't sound right. I think doing it wouldn't require so much talking about it... especially on this hodge-podge platform. Talking about it seems more like ego.
What I have been fortunate to discover over the years has saved my life. Where I was a working musician who drank too much and was in a state of decline, contemplation on the art of a talented ancestor along with discovering new ideas turned me around inside and my problem became obvious. Where the world didn’t make sense before, now its absurdities made perfect sense because of the human condition.

A forum like this is useful because a person can experience resistance and how it affects them emotionally. The ideal would be the Socratic dialogue which would produce a contradiction. It is through contemplation of the contradiction that a person can move from confidence in the dialectic into the experience of noesis. Naturally that won’t happen. But still once a person realizes why they are controlled by insult it is the beginning of freedom.
Why would a path out into the universe be horizontal? Why wouldn't it be in all directions? Such words/concepts really distort and limit the possibilities, Nick. And I think that's manipulative. I don't care who has said it, and how important anyone thinks they are. We must inquire for ourselves! No one has more of a line on ultimate truth. Yet MANY produce fanciful distortions for one reason or another.
I refer back to my explanation of the meaning of the cross. It is a symbol open to contemplation. It isn’t manipulative. It is the love of wisdom.
Everyone is truly human and worth knowing. Again with your divisions and separations... which, if I may suggest, is very unspiritual. Why wouldn't spirit encompass all? Only man superficially divides, in order to judge, control, own, etc.
People are different. However, we are the same in our ignorance not realizing what we lose by it. Once a person realizes that it is foolish for one idiot to call another idiot, an idiot, there is no sense in judging who is better. We are all in the unfortunate position as slaves to the human condition. My advantage is in my willingness to admit it.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Lacewing » Fri Jun 28, 2019 6:13 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
A seeker of truth knows they are also a victim of this same self deception so seek to learn why it is so and if they can awaken from this self deception sometimes referred to as “sleep.”
I think there can be many dreams and levels to awaken to and slip back into. And one person's idea of "wakefulness" may not be what another person considers "wakefulness". So that discussion/ideal is full of imagination.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
I have verified sufficiently for me that I am a tripartite soul. I have witnessed how my intentional aims are countered by my habitual appetites.
Okay. Such doesn't mean that this concept has Universal scope or relevance for everyone. It's just one fascination to play with.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
Simone Weil: "Nothing can have as its destination anything other than its origin. The contrary idea, the idea of progress, is poison."
I would agree that there is nowhere to GO! That is why I don't think there's something/somewhere to get "back to". (To say that there IS, is to then claim to know what/where THAT IS... which is human ego talking.) I don't imagine we've "left" anything/anywhere... and I think even the sleep-walking is part of the creative perfection. :D
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
This is one of these ideas that is difficult to explain but once a person experiences it, it can create an “aha” moment.
Yes, I've had profound moments (as I've shared) of feeling merged, not separate, and sensing complete connectivity and perfection behind the human curtain. It changed the way I think about life. The experience indicated to me that everything is ALREADY PERFECT. You appear to DISAGREE with such a view... so it appears that our AHA moments are DIFFERENT! :lol: All the more reason not to worship or cling to them, nor tell each other WHAT they SHOULD BE.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
Progress is the return to the origin of the cycle of time.
Above, you quoted Simone as saying "The idea of progress is poison". That is actually how I view YOUR claims about progress: you are essentially telling people that they are NOT spiritually where or what they should be. Think about that.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
Consider the difference between evolution and adaptation as depicted by the ancient symbol of the cross.
I'm not interested in fantasizing about symbols and their meanings. They are human creations representing human ideas. Why worship that?

Rather, I think, see the value and balance and beauty in ALL! There is much to be gained from that. Nothing specific needs to be obsessed over like a drug or savior.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
Man has the potential to become a conscious being. It is referred to as awakening which IMO is the meaning of Christian rebirth. I’m not asking you to believe it but just explaining the rational behind the religious calling much like the moth is attracted to the light.
So, you can be a moth seeking the light... or you can be the light and have fun fluttering around like a moth. :D
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
The problem is the human condition itself.
Maybe it's foolish to be convinced that any of this is WRONG as it is.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
Secular religion makes the mistake of trying to suppress it which is real spirit killer. The key is to see it for what it is, appreciate its dynamics, and make the conscious efforts to free oneself from this unnatural slavery we find ourselves in.
You speak of "seeing it for what it is and appreciating its dynamics", in this particular instance. And you say that to NOT DO SO, it to be spirit-killing. YET, there is much that you do not see for what it is, nor appreciate its dynamics, and your own ideas come across as suppression and spirit-killing. Can you see that...or do you think it's different/valid when you do it?
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
Lacewing wrote:that doesn't mean we're separated from a source.
The “we” you refer doesn’t exist. We are a plurality and all sides of our plurality claim to be I. We are....
Oh WTF ever, Nick. You are using the word "we" too! We're just communicating here.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
The question is if Man is capable of more than a mechanical necessity and serve a conscious purpose?
What big human story shall be written about that idea (which hasn't already been written)? I'm sure it will be a good one. :D
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
What I have been fortunate to discover over the years has saved my life. Where I was a working musician who drank too much and was in a state of decline, contemplation on the art of a talented ancestor along with discovering new ideas turned me around inside and my problem became obvious. Where the world didn’t make sense before, now its absurdities made perfect sense because of the human condition.
So that's your awesome and unique journey. Imagine countless of those journeys for people! ALL sacred! ALL perfect. ALL relevant.

Notice, too, how easy it is to slip back into the world, telling NEW stories... (perhaps) even bigger and brighter stories. Imagine, however, seeing the bigger and brighter stories as "absurdity" too. And imagine LOVING all of that.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
...the meaning of the cross. It is a symbol open to contemplation. It isn’t manipulative. It is the love of wisdom.
There are COUNTLESS ways to explore and express the love of wisdom and truth and awareness. Countless! To suggest that any symbols are more supreme or significant, is manipulative.
Nick_A wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:04 pm
We are all in the unfortunate position as slaves to the human condition. My advantage is in my willingness to admit it.
All you are doing is admitting to believing in the story you have written and subscribed to.

Nick_A
Posts: 4257
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Nick_A » Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm

Lacewing, it seems our major difference is that I believe the vertical levels of reality which comprise our universe are governed by the same laws which science seeks to verify as expressions of what we know of as linear time. You seem to accept the laws of science but believe we are sacred beings able to live in fantasy for no apparent purpose.

I have no idea why more people do not ask what purpose our universe serves. It seems like such an obvious question. We observe this enormous functioning machine transforming substances and call it an accident. The best I can figure is that the question suggests a Source which is rejected.

So for you, our being doesn’t serve any purpose but for me our being can serve both an animal purpose and a potential conscious purpose.
Nick_A wrote: ↑
Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:04 pm
Secular religion makes the mistake of trying to suppress it which is real spirit killer. The key is to see it for what it is, appreciate its dynamics, and make the conscious efforts to free oneself from this unnatural slavery we find ourselves in.

L. You speak of "seeing it for what it is and appreciating its dynamics", in this particular instance. And you say that to NOT DO SO, it to be spirit-killing. YET, there is much that you do not see for what it is, nor appreciate its dynamics, and your own ideas come across as suppression and spirit-killing. Can you see that...or do you think it's different/valid when you do it?
Yes, but I admit that I am vulnerable to self deception. Secularism must suppress the calling to witness beyond its limitations. I never understood why it must be so but now it is obvious that opening to the third dimension of thought which enables a person to have the simultaneous vertical experience of above and below threatens the duality which defines secularism. Remaining closed is a psychological defense mechanism. Now that is a scary thought

For some reason you believe that I want to impose these ideas on others which isn’t true. I always hope to find those who have read on these things and also try to understand why people react so violently to them. It is true that I cannot accept that fantasy and creating our own reality is logically the same as conscious experience. It is true that I believe the humanity needs the influence of those who have outgrown the need to defend fantasy. Without this influence in the world I cannot see any way humanity can survive the adverse effects of technology But at the same time those who take this view and insist on defending fantasy are welcome to it. But unfortunately secularism including secular religious expression serves to suppress the normal human impulse to have the noetic experiences which open us to our potential for our conscious higher mind.

The ideas I refer to are repulsive to you. I accept it so there is no reason for me to attack. But somehow you consider my belief insulting that there is objective reality the human condition keeps us closed to and replaces it with self justifying imagination which makes the absurdity of our lives tolerable

We are living in extraordinary times. The effects of AI will turn the majority into creatures fixated on the ground and pure pragmatism. Yet the affects will be so obvious that there will be a healthy minority who don’t want to psychologically go down with the sinking ship and will seek ways to become human. What we see happening to people will provide the incentive to consciously acquire the quality of attention which will enable them to see it for what it is and open to help from above in order to experience and become a part of conscious human meaning and purpose.

I Like Sushu
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:03 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by I Like Sushu » Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:22 am

When the members of a movement start attacking each other more and more you know the movement is dead.

My own idealistic view of feminism is to view it as a means of men and women viewing human life from the perspective of women FOR humankind (not for the benefit of men or women).

Women are role models for men as much as men are role models for women. There is strength in unity as there is a need for conflicting options.

A world without matriarchs and patriarchs is not a ‘human’ world as far as I can tell.

In broader terms who are the ‘role models’ of the modern age? Are any of them ‘living’ or do we generally prefer to idiolise the dead so they cannot be torn apart by direct questioning? It seems like the latter to me and that religious institutions used this ideological stance to the ‘role model’ to the extreme. In the modern age, where secularism has taken a greater hold, I guess we need to recreate a new ‘role’ for ‘role model’ ... what that is, or could be, I’m not certain.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Lacewing » Sun Jun 30, 2019 6:15 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
Lacewing, it seems our major difference is that I believe the vertical levels of reality which comprise our universe
Saying "I believe the vertical levels of reality", instead of saying "I believe there are vertical levels of reality", is a subtle (but not unnoticed) way of you representing your belief as something that truly exists as compared to fantasy. This is why you seem sneaky to me. You represent yourself in a different light than you represent others...saying "I (Nick) do THIS"... and "You (whoever) do THIS"... and both statements are often skewed to create a certain skewed reality that supports your beliefs.
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
I have no idea why more people do not ask what purpose our universe serves. It seems like such an obvious question. We observe this enormous functioning machine transforming substances and call it an accident. The best I can figure is that the question suggests a Source which is rejected.
Note your "casual conclusion" which happens to be very specific and limited (to suit you) amidst other obvious choices:
> They use religion to explain the Universe
> They see the Universe as a natural process with or without a specific source
> They know it's beyond our ability to fathom, so they're focused on what they CAN fathom
> They're too busy in their human drama to care about anything else
> etc.

See? All kinds of reasons which have nothing to do with "rejecting a source". It just DOESN'T MATTER. What we imagine in that regard will change nothing, most likely, right? What can we possibly do about/with it?

It's like an ant asking how deep the ocean is. The ant cannot fathom the answer, which would change nothing about the ant's life anyway, right?

Such fantasies EASILY become religion... and we know where THAT leads!!! I think a more relevant question is: "Why do some people NEED to create and command religious mentality?"
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
So for you, our being doesn’t serve any purpose but for me our being can serve both an animal purpose and a potential conscious purpose.
I think we may be serving an animal purpose and a potential conscious purpose -- I just don't claim to know what it is. I prefer to focus on the quality and intent of my energy in any given moment or state of mind, and on being a clear conduit for supporting the flow of that which is greater than myself. I don't need or want to define it into a noisy human religion of some sort.
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
Yes, but I admit that I am vulnerable to self deception.
You seem to think that you're unique in doing this. Everyone I've ever known can admit (at various points) that they are vulnerable to self-deception. I think you have a skewed view of people which you compare to yourself.
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
Remaining closed is a psychological defense mechanism.
Sure! So is making up and clinging to fantasies.

Everyone (including you) thinks their belief about reality is THE RIGHT ONE and THE ULTIMATE ONE. Most think they are having a conscious experience. Yes?
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
For some reason you believe that I want to impose these ideas on others which isn’t true. I always hope to find those who have read on these things and also try to understand why people react so violently to them.
I don't know if there are actually violent reactions from anyone -- I just know (personally) that your sneaky manipulation/distortions of communications and truth/reality (even if it's something you're not aware of) are underhanded and self-serving. Such may stir up a vocal or passionate reaction, but I don't think it's violent.
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
humanity needs the influence of those who have outgrown the need to defend fantasy.
Well, I see you defending your fantasy all the time. You can claim it is consciousness, but so does everyone else. Don't you see that, Nick? Why are you always trying to set yourself apart? Why not just be happy being part of the crowd? :lol:

YOU appear to be rejecting "the source" (as you say) if WE ARE ALL/EACH PART OF THE SOURCE. You know? You are creating DIVISIONS -- what IS and IS NOT. (What is right? What is good? What is conscious? What is vertical?) Why????????

I know, I know... you're entertained by it. So why don't you just say that? Because it is your religion -- religion is above questioning and logic and all else. Yes, yes. And you as its keeper... as the one who understands it while so many others don't... you have a purpose. Conscious... divine... you are a lighthouse and you will keep the light of truth burning. These human ideas come in so many forms all throughout our history... in so many different words and phrases and concepts... blah, blah, blah... and we always think "we see ultimate truth NOW"!!

This is why I've asked several times: What difference does it make? What if everything is just fine AS IT IS? Why do we need to compare and divide and fantasize a story or religion? To control and/or entertain? Okay. Does it screw it up if we admit we're doing that... or might our games get better?
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
The ideas I refer to are repulsive to you.
No, I don't think that. I agree with some things... and other things I find ridiculous, and I explain why. I wish you didn't exaggerate that as some sort of violent attack. Perhaps it feels that way because of how tightly you are clinging to something.
Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jun 29, 2019 8:57 pm
We are living in extraordinary times.
Indeed! I'm glad to be experiencing/witnessing it.

Many people have all sorts of stories about what is happening and why, and where it will lead. I do not know. It's fun discussing and imagining, but I'm very wary of spinning off into any certain fantasies. I'd like to keep my eyes and my mind open and flexible, attentive and accepting, grateful and playful. :D

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Lacewing » Sun Jun 30, 2019 6:45 pm

I Like Sushu wrote:
Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:22 am
My own idealistic view of feminism is to view it as a means of men and women viewing human life from the perspective of women FOR humankind (not for the benefit of men or women).

Women are role models for men as much as men are role models for women. There is strength in unity as there is a need for conflicting options.

A world without matriarchs and patriarchs is not a ‘human’ world as far as I can tell.
Well said! We do best if we support and share each other's strengths, NOT if we dominate and subdue.

The situation we experience where so many men think they are better and should be recognized as such is so extremely toxic and foolish. It blocks out the light of broader wisdom which is accessed through having the balance of women. And I think it creates a war-like undercurrent that impedes us.
I Like Sushu wrote:
Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:22 am
In the modern age, where secularism has taken a greater hold, I guess we need to recreate a new ‘role’ for ‘role model’ ... what that is, or could be, I’m not certain.
I think maybe we're learning some new "self-modeling"(?) through our increased questioning and vocalizations about the roles and beliefs that limit and bind us and make us hate each other? :) I like to think in terms of "self-mastery". If we could master ourselves individually and model that, instead of telling others what to do.

Belinda
Posts: 2806
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Belinda » Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:34 pm

Dachshund wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:58 pm
Feminism set a very bad example for women. The instigators of the movement in the academy were very bitter and twisted, screwed up human beings.And as for the countless reams of gender feminist theory they produced, the verdict of empirical science today is that it was all BULLSHIT, that is, gender is NOT socially constructed. Moreover,( to paraphrase Nietzsche), feminism was one of the worst developments in the general uglification of the West in the 20th century. Fat chicks with foul mouths, boy's haircuts, hairy legs and armpits would give all normal men the kind of erectile dysfunction ( i.e; "soft cock syndrome") that even six 100mg Viagra tablets couldn't "straighten out."

As a counter - example of an intelligent, tasteful, civilised, attractive and eminently liberated woman, I give you the late Baroness Margaret Thatcher (one of my heroes). The following quote of hers from 1987 says it all...


"Ladies and Gentlemen, I stand before you tonight in my pink chiffon evening gown, my face softly made up, my fair hair gently waved...the IRON LADY of the Western world."

Now THAT, is what I call class !


Regards


Dachshund
And a well pressed pair of trousers is classy too. Gosh, how trivial !

Belinda
Posts: 2806
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Belinda » Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:40 pm

Nick quoted:
Today we look to Weil for hope, for meditation, for the bridge a body makes. She knew that the truth had been 'taken captive,' and that we must 'seek at greater depth our own source,' because power destroys the past, the past with its treasures of alternative ideals that stand in judgment on the present."


The historical reality is males of our species with few exceptions have always up to recent years been more powerful than the females. In modern times females can and often do take on traditional male roles. There is no need for a woman with the stature of Simone Weil to make a show of herself in this regard. She actually proved her status by the way she lived. And from what I have heard about her, Weil had no occasion to dress herself other than modestly.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest