a reply to:
FlyInTheOintment
I confess, it is hard for me to feel worthy of such high praise. Thank you most kindly for the sentiment.
Truly, I too have felt the heaviness of the world weighing down upon all of us. But I remember that very often the world is colored by my own
perceptions, those perceptions must include, among other things, my own sensitivities and weaknesses, as well as a multitude of other normal human
feelings (certainly not all of them bad.)
I'm not one of those who will preach regarding attitudes, and other positive-think strategies. Just like many other people, I don't like advice that
presumes "You're doing it wrong." It's not that I don't respect them or believe that they don't have value; it's simply that I have found that, in my
own character, I sense a form of naivete about the way things 'could' be, or 'should' be. I guess that's common among those of us who spend a lot of
time thinking - alone. It seems like many people do that. They save their most serious thoughts for 'alone-time.'
There is one thing that I have noticed about 'alone-time' thinking (for me.) Without another person to 'show me a reflection' of what I am thinking
(just listening will do) ... I begin to lose perspective; It engenders a sense of actually being existentially alone. I don't think anyone can
actually be 'existentially' alone - in my reckoning.
Being alone is a kind of death sentence for the human condition. We are human - inside that idea there is a sort of default: We are human
"together."
I am not alone; you are not alone... Many great philosophies and religions all carry ancient wisdom
mostly to that effect. The idea that we
are separate, disconnected, out of each other's reach and understanding is an illusion. And like many of the illusions we take into our thoughts, it
can be poison. It can be - not is.
It makes me very pleased (downright happy) that I have had some positive impact with my words. I have little else to offer at the moment. And you
will always be most welcome to it.
There are many here who are smarter and wiser than I (which is why I come here.) And most will never hear me (many won't even listen.) But it helps
me to say this stuff. You have given me a moment of joy; I thank you.
I am grateful that I had this one time at least, I could help lift the spirit of any who might have lingered too long at the edge of despair. That is
not a friendly place. I've been there. Yuk.
- In keeping with the 'general atmosphere' and to honor the thread maker intent, I will say something about the future.
"Someone" is deciding what news we hear; "someone" decides the tone of reporting as well as the rapidity of the repetition of sorrow. These are
editorial decisions which have been relegated to the people who metricize information for money. More people will click, listen, change the channel
to see, or listen to someone speak about that which reaches their passions. After decades of mass media indoctrination - our attention is largely
drawn by the negative - mostly painted as danger. We don't exactly shun good news, but good news need not be worried about.
Odd that you have to "hunt" for good news in media now, when before we were 'protected' from the most unpleasant news by the media makers. Bad news
is easier to exploit (ever heard the editorial phrase "If it bleeds it leads?)
As people are gaining more experience actually 'observing' they are noticing that the messages which lead to the worst outcomes are ALWAYS ... "Grant
us this power/action because: The world is going to burn and crash, end in misery and pain, hunger and starvation, disease and war." ... somehow, it
never does, it never even comes close ...
The patterns of their failures are all there. Over and over, they create fear, exploit it, and move on to generate new fear.
Then we hear stories about these people with grandiose future-building plans... since they have the resources (so we are told) to affect the world
changes they fantasize about; we believe they invariably will. But these are people - not gods. They carry within them the same weakness the
remainder of the world shares. And if any of their mouthpieces - or they themselves - were questioned outside of a 'studio' or media production
effort - we might even get a glimpse of just how half-assed these people can be.
My safety position is that no celebrity deserves respect simply because they are a celebrity. Most of them open their mouths and PROVE that they are
no better than any one of us. Besides, celebrity status can now be bought and sold. wealth is no measure of any personal characteristic - no matter
what wealthy people might say. Besides, wealth can be stolen, inherited, or even won by dumb luck.
I think that it is improbable, in this reality, that the human race can being reduced to a quasi-biological state. (Imagine humans - alone among
nature - killed by an EMP, or a software glitch, or a computer virus, or an engineering flaw, or an unknown biophysical uncertainty.) Perhaps the
people who want to implement it will be the first to engage in the experiment. I propose they wouldn't be so foolish; and I would bet they wouldn't
let their children do it either.