jj: As for you Moonie, I dislike playing games with you. I'll leave it at this and you can take responsibility or not. My original comment in this thread, which was made without derision toward anyone, was cut and pasted by you and then ridiculed. In response to your ridicule, I did put aside personal feelings and I asked a simple question. "And you have a better idea?" To this I was greeted with condescension in typical Moonbeam fashion. "Because one asks a question like you got something better, does not equate to a capacity for understand an answer." Poor me, viewed by Moonbeam as incapable of understanding an answer. Well Moonie, when you find yourself capable of giving an answer, an answer relevent to this world and not your fantasy world, let me know.
-------------------------
Hehe, jj, I'm sorry you don't like to play games. But if you'll permit me to be a bit condescending and examine various potential meanings this could have, I'd be grateful indeed. I hope you can see these potential interpretations yourself, if not about you, than more generally when such remarks are made in other cases:
It could be that the person is really trying to reduce something he's beginning to see is serious back to something he can dismiss, a game. In other words what is happening may not be a game at all but incipient self reflection. It may also be that the person feels he is losing the game and wants out now. In either case the underlying trigger of response is the surfacing of ones own bad feelings and into which one has no intention to look. (I tried to find this point on Corn's pop site but all I saw was an ad for some nutty 'psychometer of truth', you know, the ones I'm always trying to make my fortune with here. I mean you laughed and praised the site as if it represented me, right? I'll refer to that joke a bit more later.)
So you're going to leave it at that and I can or won't take responsibility. Hehe, leaving things as that is the height of irresponsibility, no. You have to nurture and care for your responsibilities and beliefs, no?, responsibly, of course.
Your original response was made without derision, yes, I never said it was. So when you say I reacted with ridicule, you should be able to see several things. I either did or I didn't. You, therefore, were intentionally insulted or you weren't. If you were, as you say you maintained your cool for a while, and if not you felt you were being ridiculed because you have a self you don't see as self that is ridiculing you. In pop psychology, which I know you think is bunk, this is called the inner critic, or committee that sits on your shoulder and judges what you do. I say it's your pre-existing self hate projected on to me. They pop people avoid them self hate thingis like the plague. Like the rest of us, they don't want to know it's true.
Yup so you were cool and asked me if I have a better idea. Here's the crux of my case:
jj: Capitalism addresses the basic nature of man better than any other system and at least it's not a farce of ideals.
The unexamined assumptions are:
1. That you know the basic nature of man
2. That capitalism is addressing that issue
3. That the addressing is better than any other system
4. That you are aware of every other system
5. That capitalism is not a farce of ideals
6. That you are a good judge of what is a farce
7. That you can tell what are ideals
Hehe, some might consider the parading of such a string as perhaps a bit presumptive and maybe even a little condescending. But me, I see it as pretty typical.
My view from pop psy 1:
1. The the knowledge of the nature of man is reserved for those who know themselves. Such people are extremely rare and almost always invisible. You have to be awake to know who is awake.
2,3,4. Capitalism addresses men who are ignorant of who they are and how they respond mechanically in that ignorance. This bundle of mechanically I call the false self, the self we become when who we really are gets put down. It's our programming and includes such things as capitalism is best.
5. Capitalism is ultimately only an ideal overlain on a false reality. Because of the universality of the false reality, it works.
6. Those of the farce cannot see the farce.
7. Ideals are that which threaten to expose the farce as a farce. The programming was laid down with pain and can't be removed except by reliving that pain. Shun ideals like the plague. They can bring pain. Of course the rub is that they also bring truth.
So there is the answers to your questions; do you agree? Or was I right, that just because you seek understanding doesn't mean you are prepared to understand the truth.
The mistake. of course, you made, was to think I was talking to you. We all personalize the universal condition of our sleep. Everybody gets pissed off when there slumber is disturbed. It looks just like condescension and ridicule. But it's just the facts Mam. How you react to them has been understood for thousands of years. Like you said, you can try to deal with them or not. It's up to you.
My better idea would be to know yourself before you settle on a system for humanity. He who knows himself may not actually even need one, yes?
The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.
What are its rules?
Facebook
Twitter