|
Post by Padowan on Apr 6, 2015 14:39:49 GMT -6
I'm still struggling with multiple 'I's and verifying its concept. This is getting me closer to acceptance but not quite.
"But the seeker's verification, based on the practices of self-remembering and self-observation, rightly conducted, forced him to admit he was not the indivisible I he took himself to be. Observation revealed that each "I-of-the-moment" is a living embodiment of its truth of that moment.
The most radical discovery made at this stage was not only that he was not who he thought he was, but that he had no body. He lived in the head, the mental word-world, only aware of the body when it was in lust or fear, in need of food or drink. He spent his life unknowingly listening to the voices in his head, telling him the ever-changing "truth" of the moment, each predicated on self-love and vanity but otherwise disguised."
www.gurdjiefflegacy.org/wpp/truth.htm
|
|
|
Post by shawnhartnell on Apr 6, 2015 23:51:27 GMT -6
Consider the access state principle, which is:
The state in which a memory is made is the same state in which it's the most accessible.
In other words, if you took a snapshot of all the things that made up your general internal state (emotional, physical, physiologocal, mental) when you learned something, it will be easier to recall the closer you are to that original state.
The fellow skydivers of skydivers who "bounced" report one of two things are done by the soon to be bounced when something goes wrong with their chute:
1. They keep trying to fix it all the way down. 2. They do nothing.
In the second case, you could say that in a heightened state of fear, their training is inaccessible -- they blank -- possibly even forget that there's something to remember.
Those in the first case have something of a permenant I directing their action while the second are in the most strongly activated I at the moment -- one which didn't attend the whole's skydiving training.
|
|
|
Post by shawnhartnell on Apr 7, 2015 0:06:27 GMT -6
Have you ever went into a room an forgotten why you were there? But when you went back to where you were you remembered?
The idea and experience of multiple I's is the same as knowing that you can be primed in different ways and will feel and think a certain way according to how you've been primed. The momentary fragment of your existence within such a state is an "I". To not have multiple "I"s you'd either have to have the one I to rule them all or be capable of only one state or emotional experience with zero variation.
|
|
|
Post by Padowan on Apr 7, 2015 7:13:33 GMT -6
In the case of the skydiving 'bouncer,' the 'I' has disintegrated in the non-action skydiver. That is panic. There is no 'I' at that point. There is only living in the moment of your current perceptions. You don't exist, therefore you don't act. This is based on my own experiences with actual panic.
Using your descriptions I am formulating an opinion that 'I' is another word for 'motivation.'
|
|
|
Post by shawnhartnell on Apr 7, 2015 7:45:44 GMT -6
Motivation can be included in the pattern, but also memories, likes, dislikes, feelings, etc. A 'I' is any given pattern of arousal and inhibition which is also transient. In contrast, 'Real I', which is permenant. The I's are ever changing, in response to outside influences (stimuli) like this image. Any circular pattern is like an I (or I's) being the self for the moment it exists. i2.wp.com/laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/l3LL3.gif?fit=512%2C512In someone with a 'Real I' you'd see the same kind if thing, but also a stable structure of concentric rings emanating outward from the center. Multiple I's compose the self over time like an ant colony compose the colony all at the same time -- from bottom-up. A Real I is more like a dictatorial government -- top-down. Plato's Atlantis is relevant here.
|
|
|
Post by shawnhartnell on Apr 7, 2015 7:52:00 GMT -6
This is about the deputy steward, an intermediate stage between the two.
|
|
|
Post by Padowan on Apr 7, 2015 14:37:31 GMT -6
The Manson interpretation escapes me.
|
|
|
Post by shawnhartnell on Apr 7, 2015 15:35:03 GMT -6
The Deputy Steward is a small group of I's (can be spoken of as a single unit) which begins the process of individuation by breaking up any old structure and sorting out the total almagation into two groups -- those which are useful and those which are counterproductive.
Those that are useful are assigned work which they are naturally suited for, some of which will be useful to work against those which are counterproductive or otherwise allow them to 'starve'.
This results in a greater whole which works much more reliably and efficiently.
It's analogous to a disordered and unprofitable company coming under 'new management' which then evaluates the company's employees, fires the lazy or useless ones and giving responsibility to the good ones. (Responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!) In doing this, the new management reorganizes the company itself into one which is profitable as a whole.
It's also analgous to a coop by a small group of rebels who then does the same thing to the pre-existing government making the revolution itself a successful and worthwhile one.
It's worth noting that the fundamental principle of an organism is organization -- the deputy steward is the initial organizer.
|
|
|
Post by shawnhartnell on Apr 7, 2015 15:37:30 GMT -6
Taken esoterically, also related: My nickname for this song is "Battle Hymn of the Deputy Steward"
|
|
|
Post by Padowan on Apr 7, 2015 15:51:37 GMT -6
It's an internal culling.
All breeders do it to maintain the most useful traits.
|
|
|
Post by shawnhartnell on Apr 7, 2015 15:59:15 GMT -6
Yes, from Absolution Calling "Don't fret over pieces that smolder in the sun"
But as only an internal culling misses the point of the next line: "'cause nothing can be broken, when everything is one."
Culling is pointless without organization -- it would be like clipping random twigs in a box in two rather than clipping twigs which causes a bush look like something.
|
|
|
Post by Padowan on Apr 7, 2015 16:02:02 GMT -6
So, from a horticulturist's perspective pruning for growth, because all pruning either increases upward growth or density of growth (branching.)
|
|