Silence, Reflection and the Golden Rule

[Eodnhoj7]

The golden rule provides the foundation for how we interact both with ourselves and other's and in these respects acts as a form of structuring both ourselves and other's by allowing us to do whatever we want. We are judged by the judgement's we apply, the structures we build are the structures that contain us.

In these respects all morality is dependent upon a form of self-reflection as an act of self-structuring. The void of silence acts as a mediator in which the individual changes nothingness into the being of oneself with this nothingness merely being an inversion of oneself into a state of continual change.

In simpler terms in the present of percieved nothingness the individual is force to reflect upon his/her actions and effectively localize these thoughts, by multiplying or dividing them, into further thoughts that give premise to further action.

The continual changing of oneself, acts as the means through which one enables a sense of meaning in the respect how we change acts as the boundary which gives us identity. One may commit "x" action and upon further reflection individuate this action into further thoughts upon which "x" action as "x" thought may change into "x1" thought and action through x.

In practical terms, I may reflect upon a conversation I had with someone about "x" subject and upon further thought structure this thought through dividing or multiplying it into further parts to observation the means in which aspects of it relate. Upon this act of reflection I effectively observe the connection of certain parts within it and basically reform "x" into "x1" through "x" and from this am able to both give structure to my own understanding while simultaneously expanding upon the conversation at a further time.

It is this ability to structure one's actions through thought and thought through action, that observes the means of my being effectively existing under an inherent cycling through self-reflection where the act of reflection observes an inherent repitition of thought/action that results in a structure itself (as all structure exists through the repitition of limits of thought/action). In these respects, the act of silence enables a structuring of thought/action that we cannot observe today.

A society which cannot remain moral, practically speaking in a technocratic era, as the continual distractions do not allow for a means of self-reflection or the critical thinking necessary to structure one's self; hence an inherent form of moral entropy occurs.

[gaffo]

That golden rule provides the foundation for how we interact both with ourselves and other's and in these respects acts as a form of structuring both ourselves and other's by allowing us to do whatever we want. We are judged by the judgement's we apply, the structures we build are the structures that contain us.

In these respects all morality is dependent upon a form of self-reflection as an act of self-structuring. The void of silence acts as a mediator in which the individual changes nothingness into the being of oneself with this nothingness merely being an inversion of oneself into a state of continual change.

In simpler terms in the present of percieved nothingness the individual is force to reflect upon his/her actions and effectively localize these thoughts, by multiplying or dividing them, into further thoughts that give premise to further action.

The continual changing of oneself, acts as the means through which one enables a sense of meaning in the respect how we change acts as the boundary which gives us identity. One may commit "x" action and upon further reflection individuate this action into further thoughts upon which "x" action as "x" thought may change into "x1" thought and action through x.

In practical terms, I may reflect upon a conversation I had with someone about "x" subject and upon further thought structure this thought through dividing or multiplying it into further parts to observation the means in which aspects of it relate. Upon this act of reflection I effectively observe the connection of certain parts within it and basically reform "x" into "x1" through "x" and from this am able to both give structure to my own understanding while simultaneously expanding upon the conversation at a further time.

It is this ability to structure one's actions through thought and thought through action, that observes the means of my being effectively existing under an inherent cycling through self-reflection where the act of reflection observes an inherent repitition of thought/action that results in a structure itself (as all structure exists through the repitition of limits of thought/action). In these respects, the act of silence enables a structuring of thought/action that we cannot observe today.

A society which cannot remain moral, practically speaking in a technocratic era, as the continual distractions do not allow for a means of self-reflection or the critical thinking necessary to structure one's self; hence an inherent form of moral entropy occurs.

Golden Rule is Golden - as long as you know who starts the fight and you are not the one starting it.

then Reciprocy is the less Goldren rule (no fan of turn the cheek on enemies that start the fight - loving my enemy is bullshit as long as they start the fight).

return the favor given you - as long as you are not the one starting the "Favor".

BUT return the favor in the same proportion - to return in out of the offense is to void the moral Recipocity rule and gives them the option to continue toward more/greater offenses.

if you return the "Favor" in same proportion as that given to you first, and they return your favor - ad ifinitum...........(war of attrition - in equal measures on both sides..............per in intinity.....................not pretty, but morality is on your side (they started it - and the "War" that results - is just...............measure for measure.............they still "Started it unjustly").


again, not pretty, but at least it is Just.

[Eodnhoj7]

That golden rule provides the foundation for how we interact both with ourselves and other's and in these respects acts as a form of structuring both ourselves and other's by allowing us to do whatever we want. We are judged by the judgement's we apply, the structures we build are the structures that contain us.

In these respects all morality is dependent upon a form of self-reflection as an act of self-structuring. The void of silence acts as a mediator in which the individual changes nothingness into the being of oneself with this nothingness merely being an inversion of oneself into a state of continual change.

In simpler terms in the present of percieved nothingness the individual is force to reflect upon his/her actions and effectively localize these thoughts, by multiplying or dividing them, into further thoughts that give premise to further action.

The continual changing of oneself, acts as the means through which one enables a sense of meaning in the respect how we change acts as the boundary which gives us identity. One may commit "x" action and upon further reflection individuate this action into further thoughts upon which "x" action as "x" thought may change into "x1" thought and action through x.

In practical terms, I may reflect upon a conversation I had with someone about "x" subject and upon further thought structure this thought through dividing or multiplying it into further parts to observation the means in which aspects of it relate. Upon this act of reflection I effectively observe the connection of certain parts within it and basically reform "x" into "x1" through "x" and from this am able to both give structure to my own understanding while simultaneously expanding upon the conversation at a further time.

It is this ability to structure one's actions through thought and thought through action, that observes the means of my being effectively existing under an inherent cycling through self-reflection where the act of reflection observes an inherent repitition of thought/action that results in a structure itself (as all structure exists through the repitition of limits of thought/action). In these respects, the act of silence enables a structuring of thought/action that we cannot observe today.

A society which cannot remain moral, practically speaking in a technocratic era, as the continual distractions do not allow for a means of self-reflection or the critical thinking necessary to structure one's self; hence an inherent form of moral entropy occurs.

Golden Rule is Golden - as long as you know who starts the fight and you are not the one starting it.

then Reciprocy is the less Goldren rule (no fan of turn the cheek on enemies that start the fight - loving my enemy is bullshit as long as they start the fight).

return the favor given you - as long as you are not the one starting the "Favor".

BUT return the favor in the same proportion - to return in out of the offense is to void the moral Recipocity rule and gives them the option to continue toward more/greater offenses.

if you return the "Favor" in same proportion as that given to you first, and they return your favor - ad ifinitum...........(war of attrition - in equal measures on both sides..............per in intinity.....................not pretty, but morality is on your side (they started it - and the "War" that results - is just...............measure for measure.............they still "Started it unjustly").


again, not pretty, but at least it is Just.

True, the golden rule is a circulation where one acts according to how they want to be treated and effectively they observe their own "moral" judgement.

[gaffo]

That golden rule provides the foundation for how we interact both with ourselves and other's and in these respects acts as a form of structuring both ourselves and other's by allowing us to do whatever we want. We are judged by the judgement's we apply, the structures we build are the structures that contain us.

In these respects all morality is dependent upon a form of self-reflection as an act of self-structuring. The void of silence acts as a mediator in which the individual changes nothingness into the being of oneself with this nothingness merely being an inversion of oneself into a state of continual change.

In simpler terms in the present of percieved nothingness the individual is force to reflect upon his/her actions and effectively localize these thoughts, by multiplying or dividing them, into further thoughts that give premise to further action.

The continual changing of oneself, acts as the means through which one enables a sense of meaning in the respect how we change acts as the boundary which gives us identity. One may commit "x" action and upon further reflection individuate this action into further thoughts upon which "x" action as "x" thought may change into "x1" thought and action through x.

In practical terms, I may reflect upon a conversation I had with someone about "x" subject and upon further thought structure this thought through dividing or multiplying it into further parts to observation the means in which aspects of it relate. Upon this act of reflection I effectively observe the connection of certain parts within it and basically reform "x" into "x1" through "x" and from this am able to both give structure to my own understanding while simultaneously expanding upon the conversation at a further time.

It is this ability to structure one's actions through thought and thought through action, that observes the means of my being effectively existing under an inherent cycling through self-reflection where the act of reflection observes an inherent repitition of thought/action that results in a structure itself (as all structure exists through the repitition of limits of thought/action). In these respects, the act of silence enables a structuring of thought/action that we cannot observe today.

A society which cannot remain moral, practically speaking in a technocratic era, as the continual distractions do not allow for a means of self-reflection or the critical thinking necessary to structure one's self; hence an inherent form of moral entropy occurs.

Golden Rule is Golden - as long as you know who starts the fight and you are not the one starting it.

then Reciprocy is the less Goldren rule (no fan of turn the cheek on enemies that start the fight - loving my enemy is bullshit as long as they start the fight).

return the favor given you - as long as you are not the one starting the "Favor".

BUT return the favor in the same proportion - to return in out of the offense is to void the moral Recipocity rule and gives them the option to continue toward more/greater offenses.

if you return the "Favor" in same proportion as that given to you first, and they return your favor - ad ifinitum...........(war of attrition - in equal measures on both sides..............per in intinity.....................not pretty, but morality is on your side (they started it - and the "War" that results - is just...............measure for measure.............they still "Started it unjustly").


again, not pretty, but at least it is Just.

True, the golden rule is a circulation where one acts according to how they want to be treated and effectively they observe their own "moral" judgement.

PRECISELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WISE WORDS SIR!!!!!

I could not have said it better.

you made my day BTW!!!!!!!!!

BTW I have nothing agains the Golden Rule - I try to live my it - due to my own moral compass - but (as you imply in reply) do not let my wishfull thinking blind me in treating assholes as friends (noting not that i never transgress an make the first offense (I'm not prefect and have been an asshole many times - i try to not be so - and when i am welcome a smackdown/correction)...............and so when i know i not in the wrong and an wronged, i've not problem with returning the "Favor" and being a dick to the dick that started it (and who know - maybe in those instances they were like me and just trangressed and my dickish actions served them better than a hug...................I know it has me on the occations i was in the wrong).

I value buth Golden rule and Reciprocy Rule - each when needed.

thanks for reply!

BTW your reply has been the most wise i've noted since i joined this sight a year ago or so.

thanks again

I noted your "name" - we've conversed before - now made a more solid not of your name.

[Eodnhoj7]

Golden Rule is Golden - as long as you know who starts the fight and you are not the one starting it.

then Reciprocy is the less Goldren rule (no fan of turn the cheek on enemies that start the fight - loving my enemy is bullshit as long as they start the fight).

return the favor given you - as long as you are not the one starting the "Favor".

BUT return the favor in the same proportion - to return in out of the offense is to void the moral Recipocity rule and gives them the option to continue toward more/greater offenses.

if you return the "Favor" in same proportion as that given to you first, and they return your favor - ad ifinitum...........(war of attrition - in equal measures on both sides..............per in intinity.....................not pretty, but morality is on your side (they started it - and the "War" that results - is just...............measure for measure.............they still "Started it unjustly").


again, not pretty, but at least it is Just.

True, the golden rule is a circulation where one acts according to how they want to be treated and effectively they observe their own "moral" judgement.

PRECISELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WISE WORDS SIR!!!!!

I could not have said it better.

you made my day BTW!!!!!!!!!

BTW I have nothing agains the Golden Rule - I try to live my it - due to my own moral compass - but (as you imply in reply) do not let my wishfull thinking blind me in treating assholes as friends (noting not that i never transgress an make the first offense (I'm not prefect and have been an asshole many times - in try to not be so - and when i am welcome a smackdown/correction)...............and so when i know i no in the wrong and an wronged, i've not problem with returning the "Favor" and being a dick to the dick that started it (and who know - maybe in those instances they were like me and just trangressed and my dickish actions served them better than a hug...................I know it has me on the occations i was in the wrong).

I value buth Golden rule and Reciprocy Rule - each when needed.

thanks for reply!

BTW your reply has been the most wise i've noted since i joined this sight a year ago or so.

thanks again

I noted your "name" - we've conversed before - now made a more solid not of your name.

If you think about it, the golden rule gives complete moral freedom while maintain morality as truly existing in itself.

[gaffo]

If you think about it, the golden rule gives complete moral freedom while maintain morality as truly existing in itself.

I don't follow, but welcome discussion (we may have to agree to disagree).

for full discloser(sp) - though an Atheist, i am more Judiac than Christian in viewpoint BTW conduct, and do tend to value Reciprocity Rule over Golden Rule in the real world.

I've no problem with agreeing to dissagreeing and welcome your views on the Golden Rule.

sadly, i'm not always so smart, I would welcome your clarification upon your views of the Golden Rule as we can discuss/debate.

I thank you again for your earlier post - much wisdom in so few words!

[Eodnhoj7]

If you think about it, the golden rule gives complete moral freedom while maintain morality as truly existing in itself.

I don't follow, but welcome discussion (we may have to agree to disagree).

for full discloser(sp) - though an Atheist, i am more Judiac than Christian in viewpoint BTW conduct, and do tend to value Reciprocity Rule over Golden Rule in the real world.

I've no problem with agreeing to dissagreeing and welcome your views on the Golden Rule.

sadly, i'm not always so smart, I would welcome your clarification upon your views of the Golden Rule as we can discuss/debate.

I thank you again for your earlier post - much wisdom in so few words!

You can do what you want but you form the consequences you will be judged by.

[gaffo]

If you think about it, the golden rule gives complete moral freedom while maintain morality as truly existing in itself.

I don't follow, but welcome discussion (we may have to agree to disagree).

for full discloser(sp) - though an Atheist, i am more Judiac than Christian in viewpoint BTW conduct, and do tend to value Reciprocity Rule over Golden Rule in the real world.

I've no problem with agreeing to dissagreeing and welcome your views on the Golden Rule.

sadly, i'm not always so smart, I would welcome your clarification upon your views of the Golden Rule as we can discuss/debate.

I thank you again for your earlier post - much wisdom in so few words!

You can do what you want but you form the consequences you will be judged by.

yes, actions speak louder than words.

agreed.

If you think about it, the golden rule gives complete moral freedom while maintain morality as truly existing in itself.

is that what you meant to say above?

I'm dumb, i just do not undertand what you said in earlier post - italics above.

if it was via the latter - then i agree works over talk indeed.

if not, welcome clarification.

thanks for reply sir!

[Eodnhoj7]

I don't follow, but welcome discussion (we may have to agree to disagree).

for full discloser(sp) - though an Atheist, i am more Judiac than Christian in viewpoint BTW conduct, and do tend to value Reciprocity Rule over Golden Rule in the real world.

I've no problem with agreeing to dissagreeing and welcome your views on the Golden Rule.

sadly, i'm not always so smart, I would welcome your clarification upon your views of the Golden Rule as we can discuss/debate.

I thank you again for your earlier post - much wisdom in so few words!

You can do what you want but you form the consequences you will be judged by.

yes, actions speak louder than words.

agreed.

If you think about it, the golden rule gives complete moral freedom while maintain morality as truly existing in itself.

is that what you meant to say above?

I'm dumb, i just do not undertand what you said in earlier post - italics above.

if it was via the latter - then i agree works over talk indeed.

if not, welcome clarification.

thanks for reply sir!

One can do what they want, be good or bad, however they will suffer the consequences...however either way the person is free to do what they want and this is a constant moral system that gives foundation to good (selfless) and evil (selfish) actions.

[gaffo]

You can do what you want but you form the consequences you will be judged by.

yes, actions speak louder than words.

agreed.

If you think about it, the golden rule gives complete moral freedom while maintain morality as truly existing in itself.

is that what you meant to say above?

I'm dumb, i just do not undertand what you said in earlier post - italics above.

if it was via the latter - then i agree works over talk indeed.

if not, welcome clarification.

thanks for reply sir!

One can do what they want, be good or bad, however they will suffer the consequences...however either way the person is free to do what they want and this is a constant moral system that gives foundation to good (selfless) and evil (selfish) actions.

oh, yes indeed.

not sure if you are religious or not (I'm not - never was) - but value literacy - including stories in religious books.

one of my fav is Job - who is "Israel" (in the story he is man, but the author wrote the work when his people were occupied by the Persians for 2 centuries - his "Job" was actually "the isrealites" (his audience-readers in 250 BC understood this) though near all today have no historical understanding and have no understanding).

Job had this mindset, one i agree with. though again i do affirm Reciprocity rule too (so maybe i fall short of job).

[gaffo]

I note your view of evil as selfishness above.

that is the perfect def of evil.

you do have wisdom!

the first of the virtues - and one that is ignored in today's culture ;-(.

[Eodnhoj7]

Silence and Self-Reflection are the most powerful things a man can do. Why do you think most men fear and hate God?

It is not because God does not answer their prayers, but because the silence shows his all consuming power over everything and man can only sit back in awe and fear of himself and the Creator.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Silence and Self-Reflection are the most powerful things a man can do. Why do you think most men fear and hate God?

It is not because God does not answer their prayers, but because the silence shows his all consuming power over everything and man can only sit back in awe and fear of himself and the Creator.

In Buddhism and other spirituality, silence and self-reflection are used to understand how the "zombie parasites" has triggered the mind to be deceived with the idea of God as real when there is no such thing as a real God.

It is true many people use silence and self-reflection to understand their God [illusory] but that is only because they have not reflect deep enough.
Note my suggestion;

Theists Should Reflect What is Going Inside their Brain
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=25480

Btw, is superficial silence and self-reflection sufficient for any lay person [if not informed by others] to understand the deception of the brain/mind in the distorted-normal face illusion? NO!
It would more difficult for one to uncover and realize the deception by the brain/mind in the deception of a transcendental-purely_thoughts-illusion.

[Eodnhoj7]

Silence and Self-Reflection are the most powerful things a man can do. Why do you think most men fear and hate God?

It is not because God does not answer their prayers, but because the silence shows his all consuming power over everything and man can only sit back in awe and fear of himself and the Creator.

In Buddhism and other spirituality, silence and self-reflection are used to understand how the "zombie parasites" has triggered the mind to be deceived with the idea of God as real when there is no such thing as a real God.

It is true many people use silence and self-reflection to understand their God [illusory] but that is only because they have not reflect deep enough.
Note my suggestion;

Theists Should Reflect What is Going Inside their Brain
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=25480

Btw, is superficial silence and self-reflection sufficient for any lay person [if not informed by others] to understand the deception of the brain/mind in the distorted-normal face illusion? NO!
It would more difficult for one to uncover and realize the deception by the brain/mind in the deception of a transcendental-purely_thoughts-illusion.

If the brain is responsible for theism, then theism is a natural part of evolution and is a byproduct of matter.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Silence and Self-Reflection are the most powerful things a man can do. Why do you think most men fear and hate God?

It is not because God does not answer their prayers, but because the silence shows his all consuming power over everything and man can only sit back in awe and fear of himself and the Creator.

In Buddhism and other spirituality, silence and self-reflection are used to understand how the "zombie parasites" has triggered the mind to be deceived with the idea of God as real when there is no such thing as a real God.

It is true many people use silence and self-reflection to understand their God [illusory] but that is only because they have not reflect deep enough.
Note my suggestion;

Theists Should Reflect What is Going Inside their Brain
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=25480

Btw, is superficial silence and self-reflection sufficient for any lay person [if not informed by others] to understand the deception of the brain/mind in the distorted-normal face illusion? NO!
It would more difficult for one to uncover and realize the deception by the brain/mind in the deception of a transcendental-purely_thoughts-illusion.

If the brain is responsible for theism, then theism is a natural part of evolution and is a byproduct of matter.

Nazism is also a natural product of evolution.
The fact is theism is also in part responsible for genocides and various evil & violent acts.
The current trend is the cons of theism are outweighing its pros with the potential threat some theists could even exterminate the whole human species.

Btw, ALL evil and violent acts must be addressed and resolved, theism-related evil acts is a large part of all evil and violent acts.

Another point is theism can be weaned off in the near future with potential fool proof alternatives to deal with the inherent and unavoidable existential crisis.