Perspectology

reply to post by ImaFungi


Star
Sun
Atoms
Particles
Waves
All images of other images...

Objective and subjective?

Which is the correct image/perspective?

God says its all his image.

Just saying.

Colossians 1:13-17

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

All the structure of reality is Jesus. He is the body, image, word, form. Yahweh is the imager, creator, Father, awareness/consciousness, thinker of thoughts, interpreter. The Holy Spirit is the will, ability, motion, energy.

Pick anything you like, even one of the trinity, and all things will consist of the trinity. You cannot remove interpreter, ability, structure without removing the thing itself.

Because all things are of the trinity we have interpretations of the differences of the 3. Faith reconciles the differences. It is the only way to stop the infinite questions and perspectives.

Logarock

Bluesma


So those who try to force their perspectives on me with proclamations of it being THE TRUTH, or any sort of behavior I find disrespectful of others, really turn me off and convince me to stay away from their particular perspective, no matter what it is!

I hear what you are saying and generally agree.

I break it down into several categories that revolve around two main points. When I am being disrespected or forced or thereby forced by disrespect I break it down like this. 1. The person is demonstrating disrespect out of their own defensive narcissism, contempt, efforts to control ect ect or 2. Or they feel like they are talking to a hard headed ape so toss out disrespect of several sorts in an attempt to break through the hard head. Sadly sometimes disrespect is a valid communicative tool if other factors are present.

I think it can be even more complicated than that, because what each of us would consider "disrespect" can vary a lot! I personally find it disrespectful to dictate to another what they experience, think or feel- especially if they claim otherwise. It's a big thing to me.

You can tell me you think my experience is dumb, and that doesn't bother me- you are simply speaking the truth about your own opinion. But if you tell me that I am wrong about what I experience, I actually experience something different, that will cause me to close off all further receptivity to them.

We do not all agree on that though. Some people actually appreciate having another tell them what they feel or think- they feel confused on that and appreciate having another straighten it out for them.
But they may feel calling their feelings dumb totally disrespectful.

Different perspectives, different values.

So faced with this complicated part, I decided that, for my comfort, I am only okay with myself if I "do as I would have done to me". Others may like it or dislike it, that is their right. But I choose my perspectives accordingly.

So the person that disrespects me (in the sense I consider that to be) will have their perspectives and views rejected by me. I don't want to become like them, act as they do.

But that is not a judgement upon their inherent goodness or badness, it is a subjective judgement about my own choice of being and preference!

I don't know if I phrased that clearly, it is actually right on topic, though it might seem to be off....

reply to post by Bluesma


I'm more incline to think the opposite. If someone doesn't want to reproduce their concept, or perception, of good in you, then I think they see you as different, or they don't care enough about you, or they have no faith in their concepts or yours. i.e. You're incompatible with them in their mind.

Bleeeeep
reply to post by Bluesma

 

I'm more incline to think the opposite. If someone doesn't want to reproduce their concept, or perception, of good in you, then I think they see you as different, or they don't care enough about you, or they have no faith in their concepts or yours. i.e. You're incompatible with them in their mind.

If I understood you correctly, then that might not be so different from my view!
In a sense, I feel that if they respect me as a human being, they will be willing to propose their perspective, (acknowledging it is that) and respect my right to choose to adopt it or not.

I guess doing so does necessitate a bit of lack of faith in an objective truth above us all- at the base has to be a certain view of all of us having some power of creation for our own experience of reality.

Being incompatible is okay with me. I guess that is what I mean when I say "I shut off all receptivity". It means I have decided their concepts are incompatible with my intents for creation. It is just as acceptible for others to decide the same about mine.

The thing is, I do not see "care" and "respect" as being the same thing... neither in act nor experience.
Many people care for someone, and do not respect them- in fact that is a very common situation! They often use "care" as an excuse to NOT respect them!

In close relationships, I would like to have both care and respect, but in exchanges with people I am less intimately involved with, I'll take respect over care any day!

-So we have different intents, which could mean we choose different perspectives, accordingly.

reply to post by Bluesma

Being incompatible is okay with me. I guess that is what I mean when I say "I shut off all receptivity". It means I have decided their concepts are incompatible with my intents for creation. It is just as acceptible for others to decide the same about mine.

It is a defense mechanism - you feel that your [good] concepts are being threatened. Whatever their concept is, it challenges your belief system in some way, so you want to remove yourself from the concept to protect your own. e.g. Someone who practices Buddhism may want to be left alone by someone who says ego is the true self. Or someone who is Abrahamic may want to be left alone by someone who believes everyone is One (God).

In the above text, left alone, is what you are calling respected. Do you respect an alcoholic if you leave him to his vices? If you say yes, that expression of respect is not a lack of care, it is a sense of care for his right to do whatever he wants. If you said no, then you care enough about his well being that you want to try to change his concepts. If you said, I don't care, he can do whatever - then you truly do not care or have respect.

The thing is, I do not see "care" and "respect" as being the same thing... neither in act nor experience.
Many people care for someone, and do not respect them- in fact that is a very common situation! They often use "care" as an excuse to NOT respect them!

There is some faith/respect there. Without it, they would not care enough to reproduce concepts within you. An extreme e.g. A wife beater cares enough to try to change his wife's concepts into his concept of good, by hitting her. If he had no respect/faith that she was good enough to change, or he did not care for her at all, he would not bother trying to change her/reproduce his concept of good in her.

They respect/have faith in the good about you = they care.

Try not to think in terms of absolutes (complete care or complete lack of care) and you should see that there must be some care/respect or they wouldn't bother.

That wouldn't bother, is what I think you're confusing with "lack of respect"/left alone.

Bleeeeep

It is a defense mechanism - you feel that your [good] concepts are being threatened. Whatever their concept is, it challenges your belief system in some way, so you want to remove yourself from the concept to protect your own. e.g. Someone who practices Buddhism may want to be left alone by someone who says ego is the true self. Or someone who is Abrahamic may want to be left alone by someone who believes everyone is One (God).

A defense mechanism? Well, that is not what I would call it, but if that is what you prefer to call it, whatever. I consider it a choice because defense mechanisms I tend to consider reflexes that are are more automatic- whereas this, I experience more as a conscious choice. Automatic drives and reflexes most often go contrary to this one. It often means my will choosing to restrain my base drives.

In the above text, left alone, is what you are calling respected. Do you respect an alcoholic if you leave him to his vices? If you say yes, that expression of respect is not a lack of care, it is a sense of care for his right to do whatever he wants. If you said no, then you care enough about his well being that you want to try to change his concepts. If you said, I don't care, he can do whatever - then you truly do not care or have respect.

I can't make sense of this because I do not know what you mean by "leave him to his vices".
So I cannot understand the following yes and no propositions.
My usual response to this type of situation is to verbally express my feelings and perceptions. That's all. I leave them to do with that whatever they wish. That is respect in my mind (both for my self and them).

If it is someone I am more intimately involved with, (we have agreed to give each other more access to influence and action in each others lives) I would express my perceptions, but probably be more insistant, spend more time and energy on communication with them. I could spend days or months or years keeping up exchange, and offering aid. But I would leave the ultimate choice up to them- that would be both respectful and caring, in my view.

There is some faith/respect there. Without it, they would not care enough to reproduce concepts within you. An extreme e.g. A wife beater cares enough to try to change his wife's concepts into his concept of good, by hitting her. If he had no respect/faith that she was good enough to change, or he did not care for her at all, he would not bother trying to change her/reproduce his concept of good in her.

They respect/have faith in the good about you = they care.

That is a very good example of what I mean by "care" being used as an excuse to not respect someone!

Try not to think in terms of absolutes (complete care or complete lack of care) and you should see that there must be some care/respect or they wouldn't bother.

I never made any claim that there is only absolutes (either care, or respect). I stated clearly that all states, and combinations of , exist.
Care may coexist with respect, or there could be only one, or only the other.

That wouldn't bother, is what I think you're confusing with "lack of respect".

You have the right to your thoughts on that. I disagree. I think respect is about recognizing individual sovereignty and space. The example of the husband who beats his wife is a good example of care without respect. (and even then, I would not consider care as that evident- he may be doing it not for her, but because of his own ego and concerns about what other men in his society think of him. He may be doing it to tend to a public image he is attached to. Her and her well being might be completely irrelevant to him.)

reply to post by Bluesma


Those instinctive reflexes, both mental and physical, are your forefathers concepts of [good] hardwired into you. Whether or not you have any control over them is irrelevant to the fact that they are reflexive.

That is, all of your desires are literally reflex reactions caused by your forefathers [good] conception reproduction. Fight or flight was good, crying was good, walking was good, eating was good, and being defensive of your concepts was good; and so they have woven those concepts into the seed of their offspring.

Biological reproduction is just a branch of psychological reproduction. Good concept reproduction is the primary function/reflex and you can't escape it.

Gen 1:4
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Every motion/sound/anything you do is trying to reproduce a [good] concept - your perspective of good.

more

Which has more respect, wife beater or emotionally dead husband?

Not that wife beater is better. Obviously, his production of [good] is destructive to good concept reproduction, so he is bad, or worse, but there is no absolute lack of respect there. Clearly, wife beater would not bother if he had absolutely no respect - he would be emotionally dead husband.

note: [good] in brackets means perspective or idea of what is good. Not what is truly good, as in it is absolutely true.

-"leave him to his vices" was a play on "leaving him to his own devices." : to let someone do what they want without helping them. And a vice is a bad habit.

You cannot say someone doesn't respect you if they even bother with you. There must be something there that he respects enough to want to change it.

Bleeeeep
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Those instinctive reflexes, both mental and physical, are your forefathers concepts of [good] hardwired into you. Whether or not you have any control over them is irrelevant to the fact that they are reflexive.

That is, all of your desires are literally reflex reactions caused by your forefathers [good] conception reproduction. Fight or flight was good, crying was good, walking was good, eating was good, and being defensive of your concepts was good; and so they have woven those concepts into the seed of their offspring.

Biological reproduction is just a branch of psychological reproduction. Good concept reproduction is the primary function/reflex and you can't escape it.

I agree that reflexes are evolved over time, I also feel, however, that environment evolves and changes over time- that which was "good" for my forefathers is not necessarily "good" for me now.

Adaptability (both physically and psychologically) is influencial in evolution, survival and reproduction.

Which has more respect, wife beater or emotionally dead husband?

Not that wife beater is better. Obviously, his production of [good] is destructive to good concept reproduction, so he is bad, or worse, but there is no absolute lack of respect there. Clearly, wife beater would not bother if he had absolutely no respect - he would be emotionally dead husband.

I do not share the judgment of "emotionally dead husband"- I would consider him (the husband who chooses to NOT beat his wife) a man who has power and mastership over his drives and emotions.
It is not because he channels his emotions into other actions (like verbal expression) that he has none.

-"leave him to his vices" was a play on "leaving him to his own devices." : to let someone do what they want without helping them. And a vice is a bad habit.

It is the concept of "helping" that I do not understand. For example, you suggest that beating a person is "helping" them, out of care, so this makes me think we may not see "helping" the same way.
I have the habit of speaking to the drunks who beg in front of the store- of talking with them, and bluntly telling them what I think and feel about their behavior. But I do not beat them, nor do I use any sort of force to change them.

If you mean not beating them, I would say I choose to not help.

You cannot say someone doesn't respect you if they even bother with you.

I can and do say that. A person that decides to beat me, because I do not share the same perception as they might care about me, but certainly does not respect me.

reply to post by Bluesma


Telling a drunk how you feel, and hitting a drunk because of how you feel, is the same in regards to concept reproduction. You are trying to reproduce your [good] concept.

Truly the only thing you are doing is trying to correct the [bad] perspective that exists only within your own mind.

You do it because you care / respect something about them enough to want to reproduce your version of good within them (within your own mind).

And my posts are becoming very redundant but I feel like I have to fix your [bad] because I respect you. lol

Bleeeeep
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Telling a drunk how you feel, and hitting a drunk because of how you feel, is the same in regards to concept reproduction. You are trying to reproduce your [good] concept.

Truly the only thing you are doing is trying to correct the [bad] perspective that exists only within your own mind.

I disagree, on two points-
One- there is a huge difference to me between using any sort of force to coerce someone to change their perspective, and proposing the perspective and leaving them to make a free choice to adopt it or not.
Respect is the key difference there, regardless of care.
(intervention vs. invitation ?)

Second- I do not try to correct a "bad" perspective in such acts! I invite them to share a similar gameboard or background of perspective, as myself.
I may do this for reason such as my own comfort (I am uncomfortable with the drunk begging me for money, getting too close to me, breathing foul breath in my face, touching me with filthy hands) or simply out of that inherent social drive to relate with others around me.
If they share a similar perspective we can relate. I am capable of coming over to adopt their perspective also, in order to relate together- IF their perspective does not show to lead contrary to my current intents and preferences.

This is NOT about good and evil. I do not believe in good and evil.

And my posts are becoming very redundant but I feel like I have to fix your [bad] because I respect you. lol

Your posts are redundant because I am not receptive to your views and perceptions on these issues, and you do not respect my refusal. It seems you are having a problem agreeing to disagree.
You came in telling me what I feel and think (contrary to what I actually feel and think) right after I explained that I do not choose to join people in their perspectives if they do that. So this is no surprise- did you want to test me and see if I was telling the truth??

I will not choose to see your view of care/respect as being one and the same, nor my personal choices and preferences as being "good", all others "bad".
This, precisely because you are doing behavior I don't want to do myself, so your perceptions are not appropriate for me.

The beliefs in good and evil have been rejected by me for a long time, on that basis. They are the probably the most influencial concepts in the rise of disrespectful behavior towards others. (as I percieve disrespect to be, and personally do not enjoy it)

reply to post by Bleeeeep


Later, after having my breakfast, a metaphor hit me, which might have been a better vehicle for all that I have said.

The forced reproduction of your perspective (meme) is akin to rape.
There is a difference between rape and making love- that difference is respect for the receptive individual, and their will.

I do not enjoy rape, and do not wish to vehicle memes which can only reproduce through that sort of interaction. So I refuse those.

That does not mean rape of this sort is "bad" inherently- some people may like it and have the right to do it and have it done to them! I simply make a choice for myself and my experience creations.

Bluesma

Logarock

Bluesma


So those who try to force their perspectives on me with proclamations of it being THE TRUTH, or any sort of behavior I find disrespectful of others, really turn me off and convince me to stay away from their particular perspective, no matter what it is!

I hear what you are saying and generally agree.

I break it down into several categories that revolve around two main points. When I am being disrespected or forced or thereby forced by disrespect I break it down like this. 1. The person is demonstrating disrespect out of their own defensive narcissism, contempt, efforts to control ect ect or 2. Or they feel like they are talking to a hard headed ape so toss out disrespect of several sorts in an attempt to break through the hard head. Sadly sometimes disrespect is a valid communicative tool if other factors are present.

I think it can be even more complicated than that, because what each of us would consider "disrespect" can vary a lot! I personally find it disrespectful to dictate to another what they experience, think or feel- especially if they claim otherwise. It's a big thing to me.

You can tell me you think my experience is dumb, and that doesn't bother me- you are simply speaking the truth about your own opinion. But if you tell me that I am wrong about what I experience, I actually experience something different, that will cause me to close off all further receptivity to them.

We do not all agree on that though. Some people actually appreciate having another tell them what they feel or think- they feel confused on that and appreciate having another straighten it out for them.
But they may feel calling their feelings dumb totally disrespectful.

Different perspectives, different values.

Well I do draw the line when to much force is being used. I wasn't suggesting that people that need straightened out are confused at all or appreciate having the heat turned up on them. Most that need straitened out are the most sure of themselves folks you will find. These cant be helped much anyway and in most cases are free to do as they please anyway.

I am probably more like you in most regards and do have criteria for what constitutes a disagreement that involves a set down and talk between open minds even if no agreement is arrived at. No harm no foul we are both respected. And then there is force and coercion which is not the work of two minds simply disagreeing.

I will make my son clean his room in a manner of speaking. He will be forced. But I won't force him or coerce him into a position on more abstract things.

reply to post by Logarock


Hey

reply to post by Bluesma


Your voice would be your force, and the lack of invitation, for your opinion, from the drunkards, makes it a(n) rape intrusion of their mind?

These are the [bad] concepts that you would be trying to correct within your own mind:
-begging me for money
-getting too close to me
-breathing foul breath in my face
-touching me with filthy hands

Me, me, my, me - the [bad] only exists within the mind?

In their mind, their begging, getting close, breathing in your face, and touching you are not [bad]? To them, begging for money makes getting close with foul breath and filthy hands a [good] thing to do - their intentions are to create [good]?

You both are just trying to reproduce [good] concepts?

Unless you're telling me you asked the drunkards, or they asked you, if you could give them your opinion before you did so?

Only questions can be a propositions, right?

I'm not trying to cast blame on you - I'm just trying to get you to see, from my perspective, that it's all just different perspectives of [good] and respect and care.

That is, even if the drunkards came and chewed on your arm, there is something they respect about you: whether it be your power, which makes you a potential threat or [bad], or just your look, which they perceive to be yummy food.

P.s. I appreciate your ability to think freely, deeply, and logically. There's not many people around here who won't run when it gets too deep or free.

P.s.s. I made most comments into questions to show there is not much difference in propositioning and forcing. Questions are just a polite way of trying to force concept production. Sneaky, yes, but there was good intentions in it.

P.s.s.s. While I'm thinking about it: It is our lack of faith in the drunkards which corrupts their deeds. If we saw through their eyes it would be good. Faith is the key.

reply to post by Logarock


Hey

Bleeeeep


These are the [bad] concepts that you would be trying to correct within your own mind:
-begging me for money
-getting too close to me
-breathing foul breath in my face
-touching me with filthy hands

Me, me, my, me - the [bad] only exists within the mind?

In their mind, their begging, getting close, breathing in your face, and touching you are not [bad]? To them, begging for money makes getting close with foul breath and filthy hands a [good] thing to do - their intentions are to create [good]?

You both are just trying to reproduce [good] concepts?

These acts are not good or bad, I don't use these concepts. These acts are what I am uncomfortable with.. That is all. I am also uncomfortable with compliments- would you call compliments "bad" then?
I just throw out all usage of the concepts of good and evil. There is what I prefer, and what I do not. What I enjoy and what I do not. What I intend and what I do not. Each human has these too, and we go around seeing if any of our preferences and intents are complimentary or similar.

With the drunk beggers in our example, I tell them , "When you do this, I feel repulsed. I don't want to stop and talk to you, I don't want to listen to you, to become a friend to you, or help you in any way.
If you were drinking less, and could clean yourself up better, approach me in a less invasive manner, we could relate and exchange. There might be many people who would react differently to you in that case!"

That's all. I suggest a different path, a different choice, and the potential experience it could create for them. Maybe they don't want me to listen to them, relate to them, be their friend- in which case, they would reject my suggestion. And that is their right. I only suggest ideas, give feedback... they know what they want ultimately, not I.

I'm not trying to cast blame on you - I'm just trying to get you to see, from my perspective, that it's all just different perspectives of [good] and respect and care.

There it sounds like you are trying to point out the "good intent" all people have. I would not argue that, it is not the same, however, as saying their "good intent" is RESPECT.

That is, even if the drunkards came and chewed on your arm, there is something they respect about you: whether it be your power, which makes you a potential threat or [bad], or just your look, which they perceive to be yummy food.

There is no reason for us to continue on this issue, because we disagree on the concept of "respect".
In this phrase, it sounds like you are describing that "their attention is drawn to you". Attention is not respect. One can get lots of attention from others, and no respect (look at Miley Cyrus )

Our own intent is not "good" intent- it is simply our own, and to assume others should have it too is lack of respect.

Respect is to recognize boundry between self and other, to acknowledge their separate being-ness and individual creativity of intent.

Why I can always be found rejecting those belief systems that search to erase all sense of boundry between self and other- those are the kind that most feel they have the right to rape- because it isn't rape if there is only one, right? It is just... masterbation!

Bleeeeep
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Your voice would be your force, and the lack of invitation, for your opinion, from the drunkards, makes it a(n) rape intrusion of their]

Apparently I didn't clarify what I mean by such disrespectful attempts to dictate ones perception upon another. I' ll continue with this example-

"You are doing something you shouldn't. What you are doing is bad, and you must change. You think you are happy, you say you like your life, but you aren't and you don't. You actually are miserable, because you wish you were rich and not struggling with latent homosexuality. You must stop drinking and join this church"

There, you have some wild assumptions, which contradict what this stranger has expressed, about what they feel, desire, and experience. ... a moral judgement, and an arrogant dictation of what they "should" do or be instead.


(I remind that I said cases of close intimate relationships are different. )

reply to post by Bluesma


I can see you're getting aggravated, and that is not my intent, so just these final thoughts, and I'll leave you alone:

If it is not a desire to produce [good] concepts, what is it which makes you choose what is "simply your own intent?"

To say instinct, or just because, would not be answering the question - it is not a deep enough/root answer.

This is as close as I could come to agreeing with you:
There is no disrespect towards the person - there is only a lack of faith in their ability to/have produce(d) [good].

That is a lack of faith in their ability to produce [good], or a lack of faith that what they have produced is [good]. Lack of respect is only in the concept they have produced, which is why the concept is ignored or disregarded. The concept is the wife of the emotionally dead husband - there is no respect, or care, for it, so it is ignored or not bothered with.

You're welcome to have the final word now. I concede - say whatever you want, and you win. It was fun.

reply to post by Logarock


I was pretty unclear, I guess. Forcing someone to do something, because it is appropriate or necessary, within the roles we have agreed to play for each other (your parent, your boss, your teacher...) is not what I objected to.

It is the dictation of perception, belief, thought, feeling..... if I say I am happy and am told "You are unhappy", or I say "I do not believe in this...." and am told "You believe in this...."
It is strangers that suddenly project a bunch of nonsense that has nothing to do with you, it is the claim that what I think I feel, or experience, is not.


There is a way I watch people try to influence others through such dictation. By repeating over and over- "You are upset" for example, makes the target eventually becomes upset.
As Bleeep brought up, such commands can be reinforced with physical impact (beating, starvation or lack of lack sleep....) in more extreme cases.

Those can even be doen with so called "good intents" and "care", with real belief that the person will be better off with the new state of mind or experience programmed into them.
I don't care whether it is done with care or not. That is irrelevant to me.

I prefer to have the right to speak for myself and what is going on inside me, and to respect that right for others, as much as I can. It is my intent anyway.

I tell my kids, my students, (and the employees I had) what to do, within the limits of our agreement and relationship. But I do not tell them what to feel, what to think, believe, or dictate their inner subjective experience to them.

reply to post by Bluesma


Hey