Friday, October 31, 2014

I found happiness at the end of a rainbow!? Just kidding Day 188

Where we idealize happiness to be: at the end of a rainbow. And where can happiness only be found? Well in this moment, duh.

So I was what you called, an introvert. And for most of my life, I am currently 24, I dreamed and imagined having many awesome friends, and have a great woman by my side. I would literally imagine being old, inviting all the friends in my life and there would be hundreds, and they would all come to see me, and I would host this great big party. Everyone would get along, and we would have a great time. Within that I felt, what I called feeling truly happy. This is what I wanted, to have many relationships with many people, and being loved and cared for, almost honored, perhaps revered. This has defined me in many ways, including what I thought/believed would make me really/truly happy.
There had been moments in my life where I would be in situations where I made new friends, and we went out together and did things. Perhaps we went to a friends house, or we were just hanging out together doing things together, as a group or unit. In such moments I felt truly happy. I wanted that moment to never end. I wanted to be there forever. And… of course, such moments ended.
Afterwards I would feel very sad, and disappointed, almost depressed. I had an extreme longing and wishing to be in that moment again. I would remember such moments, and play them over and over, again and again in my mind. I would remember all the details, the peoples, the things we were doing, and especially how I felt. So in essence, in principle, what I ended defining happiness to be, was based on how I felt in those moments. I would feel sad/bad, missing and longing for such moments. So I easily, perhaps naturally defined such moments/memories as what I desired or wanted, and what would bring me true happiness.
My personalities and self-perceptions were developed and shaped by this definition of happiness. I blamed and critized myself harshly on my social skills as a reason why I couldn’t achieve such happiness. It actually became a life long goal and struggle to develop effective communication/social skills. And I would say my desire to feel happy, made it worse, because it was like this over-bearing, and hovering cloud that cast a shadow on me and made it more difficult, because I felt so nervous, and longing, and sad.
I recognize that some people find happiness in being wealthy, doing drugs, or other things. For me, these moments of social relations, was my drug, and was my wealth that I desired. It was more important than money. And all of my life focus was on finding and developing that, which evolved into pursuits of self-perfection and tackling my mind, which I had identified as the source of my troubles (spoiler, the source is you!)
Oddly, strangely enough when I started stopping what I felt, this longing, the energy, the emotion behind this desire I had created, I actually could speak and express myself openly and clearly. And this is not what someone else had told me or verified for me. I can see now, when and as I speak how much more clear I am in what I am going to say. Because inside me, I am much more clear, and so its reflects in my words.
The process I walked in stopping what I felt, the energy and emotions, involved starting with unconditional self-forgiveness, from the starting point of doing it for me because I want what is best for me, and I want the same for everyone else, what is best for them, so I release and stop all the obstacles and blocks that I had created/step up that have been preventing me from expressing me and living without these limitations or weights. I write for you now examples of the self-forgiveness I have/had and still walking, as it is a living walking, happening in every moment, which is how I know it is real, when I live it now. And I admit I will write new forgiveness that I have never written or spoken before.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to seek happiness through friendship, instead of living happiness as caring for myself, physically, and ensuring my well-being and the well-being of others, through living the principle of what is best for all.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to limit my definition of happiness to just what I feel, and what others feel, instead of including perhaps the most important part, our physical bodies, because when our physical bodies suffer, it means the physical body is breaking down, like a car breaking down, and requires repair, maintenance, as well as preventative steps to prevent future trouble, and I can live without feelings, but I can’t live without the body.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to see it as ok and acceptable to stay within one dimension of myself, which is how I feel, and within so being blind and aware to what is happening here in totality, holistically, and so include the reality of my physical body, and my immediate physical environment, as well as the physical environment that extends farther than what I can see or perceive with my eyes, and ears, but that does exist and has an influence on my immediate environment, and thus on me.
I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to within seeking/pursuing what I have defined and called to be the ultimate happiness for me, to be willing to do whatever it takes, whatever abuses, whatever harm that may occur to me or others to achieve it, because it is my happiness, my precious, and I have a right to my happiness, because I have free choice.
When and as I see myself arguing for my right to choose happiness, and do whatever it takes to achieve it- I stop and I breathe- and I realize that the happiness I am arguing for is an energetic experience based off my past experiences, and constructed out of my memories, that was not designed and created by me with full awareness as to all the consequence, results and requirements to achieve this happiness, and thus this means that I could potentially had defined happiness to mean practically anything else, and so this particular happiness I am arguing is just a random choice, and not real free choice, and so is invalid, and ridiculous to argue for and try to create when I am not even aware as to a real valid reason as to why I want to achieve this particular result for this particular energetic feeling experience, other than this is what it has always been and existed in me for as long as I can remember. If I were to tell you I am willing to do anything to achieve something, and I can’t tell you why I decided to do that thing, because I don’t have a real reason, that seems crazy doesn’t it? Yet this is this case for me. – I realize I do have a choice, and that choice is to do what is best for all, which is measureable, physical, it can be calculated and determined, it can be seen and tested in the physical reality, and the result can be guaranteed and predicted, and so it is not a fanciful wish that is happenstance, but rather it is something real, hard, and has perhaps the best reason for doing it, which is because it is best for all, which is best for me, which is so obvious and commonsense, that I can’t see anyone who would try and argue, fight or resist that statement without them appearing to me as a fool.
So I commit myself to live the word happiness, for me personally, in how I wish to live/create happiness in my lifetime, to mean what is best for all, as something physical, calculable, determinable, visible, that happens and is created in real time, before my eyes, that is undeniably what is best for all, and will ensure what is best for all, and a life that is best for all on this earth.  

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

The Animal Kingdom Day 187

"I am one and equal to my dog Shana"

Read this blog for context:

So when walking my dog Shana, like today, I try to keep pace with her. Meaning I am not too far ahead or behind her. I try to allow her to explore and go where she wants. I say try, because sometimes I require to direct her, which I do, when I see its important. One danger, is that she would fight with a female dog. Dogs of the same sex, female-female, or male-male, tend to fight. It hasn't happened in a long time, but it could happen. So I do have to be aware of the surroundings. Also when we cross streets, I need to make sure she does it quick enough to avoid an accident with the cars. We also cannot walk for forever, so I do guide her back and bring her back home. The same principles described here, I see being relevant to all other contexts of my life. For example, I require to guide and direct myself sometimes, and sometimes I can explore and do particular things I would like to do. Though the moment sometimes calls for certain actions or tasks to be completed, so I direct myself to do that. I cannot do one thing forever, so I direct myself home or to rest. And I will sometimes be in some contexts where I require to direct other people. I mean really, a person is an animal. Haha. I can see how in some people's minds that they see it as insulting to be called an animal, but look here:

We both have skeletons. Bones. Look at our internal organs. Its the same. We have penises or vaginas, hearts, stomachs, digestive tracts, lungs, blood and much more in common. We have skin, eyes, mouths, noses, ears, hair. The question would be what don't we have in common? haha, because we have so much in common. For whatever it may be, humans have more responsibility. I won't say humans have more power than dogs, but certainly humans haven't been owning up to the power they have, whatever amount it may be. Humans require to live their responsibility, much in the same way other animals live up to their responsibility. Animals act in harmony with their environment. So really, humans would aspire to be like the animals, if anything, that is to live in harmony with their environment. But really the point is equality, so we don't need to put ANYONE as more or less, but rather see what we can learn from the animals, plants, and nature as principles they embody.

So when I say I am one and equal to my dog Shana, I am really saying, what can I learn from Shana. What has Shana lived and applied? How is Shana living? And what would be best for all to live now knowing these answers?

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to view animals, plants, or nature, as above or less than myself, instead of standing one and equal to animals, plants and nature, and learning from them as much as possible, so I can be more effective.

When and as I see myself judging, believing, thinking or saying that animals, plants or nature is above or less than me, I stop and I breathe- I realize that the physical reality is one and equal, meaning we all function according to the same laws and rules, and our structures are built accordingly, with great specificity, which is evidenced by how much we have in common with dogs.

I commit myself to learn as much as I can from animals, plants, and nature, as well as this entire physical reality as a whole, so as to encompass each and every point, and may that knowledge serve and be used for what is best for all, to the best of my abilities. 

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

What has been forsaken and forgotten, and is the only thing that matters? Day 186

"I am one and equal to a tree."

I remember early on, there was a moment when I had recently heard of oneness and equality, and I wanted to apply the principle absolutely. When I said/thought the statement that "I am one and equal to a tree," I had an interesting reaction. I reacted with resistance, as if saying "No I am not one and equal to a tree, I am above a tree." I saw that this statement was saying also how I was less than a tree for saying how "I am above a tree." That is when I learned several things. One, if anyone says they are above something, then that means they are below it. Two, if anyone has resistance to saying that they are equal to something, whatever that may be, then they are actually participating in inferiority. You see, when a person sees themselves as superior, its because they actually feel inferior. If a person didn't feel inferior, they wouldn't have to try and appear and believe that they are superior. They could just be equals, and a test for this I found was to say "I am equal to _____." So I spent some time testing this, and correcting myself, if I had any resistance, until I covered everything I could think of. I thought of old friends, old acquaintances, and placed them before me, in a point of oneness and equality. And I would see instantly any point of resistance to standing one and equal, so I would forgive that, until in my mind, we stood one and equal.

At least on my mind level, I have no trouble saying I am one and equal to anything. I am one and equal to war, rape, murder, death of children, life, birth, growth, change, destruction, rot, smell, flowers, animals, plants, bacteria, shit, compost, food, etc... And when I say that statement, I can see clearly how each thing relates to me. How i participate in wars, rape and murder. When I fight and argue for being the one that is right, that is war. When I push my body too far, or do not give myself enough support, that is a rape. When I used to think of women sexually in my mind, that was rape. When I was younger I would think and say how I wish my cousin and brother would die. I also murder plenty of plant life and animal life, so that I can stay alive each day. I consume their flesh. So I see, saying how I am one and equal to these things, and meaning it, allows me to see other dimensions that I wouldn't otherwise have seen before. And when you really look at the point, there is no excuse or reason to not say you are one and equal to everything/anything. To have resistance to making that statement, which is in essence a decision, says a lot about you. And that's whats cool about the phrase in the first place, it reveals how we are not one and equal, so that we can become one and equal.

For me there's not a doubt in my mind, what the point that we all have to realize. Our oneness and equality, which essentially has been both forsaken and taken for granted for much of the breaths we have taken, that has been keeping us alive. It takes both humility and a huge sack of balls to realize and admit, how all of our accomplishments, all of them from the small to the big, are all because of a million, billion, trillion, gazillion things that exist that allowed that to happen. Is that not evidence of the obviousness of Oneness and Equality? And if you are one and equal you could admit that easily, without hesitation. I could spent forever, writing on oneness and equality and how it applies in the infinite number of contexts that we live in, called this moment. Oneness and equality is the fabric of our existence, on the deepest physical layers of chemistry, physics, biology, and human systems like economics, mathematics, sciences, etc... Oneness and equality is how gravity works, what allows a ball to be thrown to another person and caught. There is about a million things that keep us alive, and there are probably infinitely more that do that we don't know about yet. Life is not a mystery, it can be studied, learned and applied. By studying oneness and equality, you will have the answer to any situation.

There is something to say about each one, how one responds to oneness and equality. Those two words, very specific, and both are needed. You can't have just oneness or just equality. If you do then its an imbalance. You need both oneness and equality. If you're a person that would like the answers to the universe, I have just given you the only answer you need, to uncover all other answers.

Another interesting test is how any problem, any problem at all, is due to there not existing/being oneness and equality present or understood in the people who are perceiving  the problem. Because you only have a problem,  when you believe you cannot find a solution or no solution exists. That would the only problem, lol.  The solution would be standing one and equal to the problem, no separation. Can you do that? It only takes your will to do it.

Saturday, October 25, 2014

Creating the greatest happiness - A look into Mill's Utilitarianism (day 185)

So I will be continuing with the Moral Philosophy theme that I started yesterday with a post on Kant's Categorical Imperative .  I mentioned Mill's Utilitarianism, which was another topic covered in my introduction to Ethics course in Reed College. Let me say that Mill's writing is much more clearer or easier to read than Kant's writings. I copied and pasted this from wikipedia.
The essay is divided into five chapters, namely
  1. General Remarks;
  2. What Utilitarianism Is;
  3. Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility;
  4. Of What Sort of Proof the Principle of Utility is Susceptible; and
  5. On the Connection Between Justice and Utility.
In the first two chapters, Mill aims to define precisely what utilitarianism claims in terms of the general moral principles that it uses to judge concrete actions, as well as in terms of the sort of evidence that is supposed to be given for such principles. He hopes thus to do away with some common misunderstandings of utilitarianism, as well as to defend it against philosophical criticisms, most notably those of Kant. In the first chapter, he distinguishes two broad schools of ethical theory – those whose principles are defended by appeals to intuition and those whose principles are defended by appeals to experience. He identifies utilitarianism as one of the empirical theories of ethics.
In the second chapter, Mill formulates a single ethical principle, from which he says all utilitarian ethical principles are derived:
The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest-Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure.
Most importantly, it is not the agent's own greatest happiness that matters "but the greatest amount of happiness altogether."[1] Utilitarianism, therefore, can only attain its goal of greater happiness by cultivating the nobleness of individuals so that all can benefit from the honour of others. In fact, notes Mill, Utilitarianism is actually a "standard of morality" which uses happiness of the greater number of people as its ultimate goal.
The Greatest-Happiness Principle, deals with doing the greatest good for the greatest number of people. With the famous words "it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied", (260) Mill touts the importance of being well brought up and knowledgeably curious about the world, and understanding higher pleasures such as art and music, than to be uneducated and complacent. One need not be personally satisfied with one's life to be able to contribute to the "total sum happiness" of a society.
Mill goes on to discuss what is meant by "pleasure" and "pain" in his formulation of the Greatest-Happiness Principle, to argue that it encompasses intellectual as well as sensual pleasures, and to offer a defence of intellectual pleasures as preferable not only in degree, but also in kind, to sensual pleasures. Throughout the volume, Mill writes mainly as if addressing opponents of utilitarianism, but here he is trying also to criticise and refine the understanding of the Greatest-Happiness Principle offered by earlier utilitarians, Jeremy Bentham in particular.
In the third chapter, Mill discusses questions concerning the motivation to follow utilitarian moral principles. He explores ways in which both external and internal sanctions – that is, the incentives provided by others and the inner feelings of sympathy and duty – encourage people to act in such a way as to promote general happiness.[2]
The fourth chapter offers Mill's attempt at an inductive proof of the Greatest-Happiness Principle, on the grounds that happiness and happiness alone is desired as an end in itself.
The fifth chapter concludes the essay with a discussion of problems concerning utilitarianism, as well as the concept of justice. Critics of utilitarianism often claim that judging actions solely in terms of their consequences is incompatible with a foundational and universally binding concept of justice. Mill sees this as the strongest objection to utilitarianism and sets out to argue
  1. that a binding concept of justice can be explained in strictly utilitarian terms; and
  2. that the problems created by the utilitarian explanation are difficult problems for any concept of justice whatsoever, whether utilitarian or not.
Finally, to be truly happy, Mill believes that we must turn our attention away from our own happiness towards other objects and ends, such as doing good for others and such high pleasures in life as art and music.


So I would like to now explain what I understood Mills to mean, in my own words. So basically Utilitarianism, is about everyone's needs/benefits being considered. So if you do something that harms another, even if it increases your happiness, it is not acceptable, because you are causing suffering. So whenever you decide to act, you need to consider how others will be effected. This is the essence. This sounds somewhat similar to Kant's Categorical Imperative, what we looked at last time.  It also is similar or the same to Jesus' Do onto others what you would have them do onto you (aka the Golden Rule). These three people and their words are similar because they require you to place your perspective in the lives of everyone, to see things through their eyes, and stand within their shoes, within calculating and making your decisions. That is the essence of the message and part of what I find each to be so important.

There is something else that Utilitarianism has that is important to note. One has to consider oneself equal to everyone else. This means your happiness or contentment is just as important as anyone or everyone else's. So specifically the "greatest happiness principle" means that we live by creating/making decisions that create the greatest total amount of happiness. So if you have a decision or action that would benefit just you, or would benefit many more people, the decision to be made that would be best would be to help more people.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to consider other people's happiness, as less or more important than my own, and I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to consider my happiness as more or less important than another person's happiness.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to limit the definition of happiness to one form, instead of it being the absolute form of what it means to really live the best life, so that happiness takes the highest or best or ideal form possible, and not be limited to simply one context or one area of life, but to include all contexts and all areas, so as to be all inclusive, instead of divisive.

When and as I am speaking to someone about, happiness, what is best for all, or what is ideal, or how we should live or direct our lives, and why- I stop and I breathe- I realize that it is best to speak in and use the language of the average person, or the common language, and in the common language, happiness is quite superficial, so if I use happiness, to be sure, exact and precise to mean exactly what I intend to mean that the other person understands. I realize too that I have the ability to qualify or explain what I mean, however if there are a few words that refer to what I mean, that it is best to save time and use those words, if they are sufficient to explain the point I wish to express. I realize the purpose of communication to express a point and that point is understood, and I realize that the original purpose of philosophy may not be to communicate clearly, however, I cannot say for sure, because great philosophers of the past spoke a different language than the one spoken today in modern english, and were also translated from other languages, so it is certainty there is much miscommunication or misunderstanding based on the conventional language used today compared to the past - I realize that it is best that we each become effective speakers and communicators, to explain/speak our own philosophies, rationalities, ways of living/beings, religions, ways of perceiving the world, and to focus and develop that which we are, our words, statements, and beliefs, to be that which is best or best for ourselves, and best for everyone, so that we do not rely on any single individual to inform us of who we are, whoever that person may be, but to instead, to develop who we are ourselves, because of how aware we are that much can be loss in communication, and so it is best to not trust someone words, but to question, and find the root or the principle behind the words so we can live that in all contexts and situations. So in essence, keep what is best, for ourselves, and everyone.

I commit myself to speak with the intention or starting point to create the perception in the other person, exactly what it is that I see and understand, and so change how I speak, and what words I speak, and stop any reactions or possessions of energy, to allow me to be effective in perceiving the other person in real time, and to act immediately to direct their perception and awareness to the exact points relevant to creating their perception.

Lastly, if humans were to self-honestly live utilitarianism, they would have to include the happiness and suffering of every single person on the planet, and thus self-honestly have to end poverty, starvation, and wars. Because those sufferings, can't and won't change no matter how happy you make yourself, and you will feel great once you take care of those points, so all the reason to sort out those massive forms of suffering, which have become systematized. If you would like a practical way of going about HOW to do this, I suggest looking into LIG, or the living income guaranteed. They have the how, you just need to act on it.

Friday, October 24, 2014

Are people just means to an End? A look into Kant's Categorical Imperative (day 184)

I attended Reed College. In my freshman year I took the introduction to ethics course. In the course we covered Mill's Utilitarianism, Kant's Categorical Imperative, and Aristotle's Nicomachean ethics. I would like to share what I saw as important for human beings to be aware, which I received from reading the works done by these men. These important things are still relevant today in my life, and how I live. I copied and pasted a section from wikipedia on Kant's Moral Philosophy. I suggest for the reader to read through it, even if you may not understand everything completely, so to at least have an idea. I will then explain how I understood Kant's philosophy in my own words, and by examples.  

Section from Wikipedia

Kant is known for his theory that there is a single moral obligation, which he called the "Categorical Imperative", and is derived from the concept of duty. Kant defines the demands of the moral law as "categorical imperatives". Categorical imperatives are principles that are intrinsically valid; they are good in and of themselves; they must be obeyed by all, in all situations and circumstances, if our behavior is to observe the moral law. It is from the Categorical Imperative that all other moral obligations are generated, and by which all moral obligations can be tested. Kant also stated that the moral means and ends can be applied to the categorical imperative, that rational beings can pursue certain "ends" using the appropriate "means". Ends that are based on physical needs or wants always give merely hypothetical imperatives. The categorical imperative, however, may be based only on something that is an "end in itself". That is, an end that is a means only to itself and not to some other need, desire, or purpose.[51] He believed that the moral law is a principle of reason itself, and is not based on contingent facts about the world, such as what would make us happy, but to act upon the moral law which has no other motive than "worthiness of being happy".[52] Accordingly, he believed that moral obligation applies only to rational agents.[53]

So one thing that the above wikipedia section fails to capture is something very important in how Kant determined what was a Categorical Imperative. So Kant used an example to demonstrate how we would determine a Categorical Imperative. It is essentially that something that you do, that you have to consider what would occur if every other person did the same thing you did. The example he wrote was on lying. If everyone lied on the planet, he said, then all businesses would be untrustworthy, and customers wouldn't be able to purchase anything in confidence. In essence, it would be disastrous. Because of this, it is a Categorical Imperative, to not lie, but to tell the truth. What famous individual said the same thing as Kant? Jesus. Jesus said to do onto another what you would have them do onto you. So in essence, you need to live and act in a way that everyone were to act that way. So basically, placing yourself in the shoes of every single person, and how would the world be if everyone acted exactly like you. If you can't say it would be best, then you need to change how you act so that it would be best. The details of this is found on wikipedia, see below.

The first formulation

The first formulation (Formula of Universal Law) of the moral imperative "requires that the maxims be chosen as though they should hold as universal laws of nature" .[55] This formulation in principle has as its supreme law the creed "Always act according to that maxim whose universality as a law you can at the same time will" and is the "only condition under which a will can never come into conflict with itself [....]"[60]
One interpretation of the first formulation is called the "universalizability test".[61] An agent's maxim, according to Kant, is his "subjective principle of human actions": that is, what the agent believes is his reason to act.[62] The universalisability test has five steps:
  1. Find the agent's maxim (i.e., an action paired with its motivation). Take for example the declaration "I will lie for personal benefit". Lying is the action; the motivation is to fulfill some sort of desire. Paired together, they form the maxim.
  2. Imagine a possible world in which everyone in a similar position to the real-world agent followed that maxim. With no exception of one's self. This is in order for you to hold people to the same principle required of yourself.
  3. Decide whether any contradictions or irrationalities arise in the possible world as a result of following the maxim.
  4. If a contradiction or irrationality arises, acting on that maxim is not allowed in the real world.
  5. If there is no contradiction, then acting on that maxim is permissible, and is sometimes required.

So hopefully the reader has been able to understand things so far, because I would like to share another important point. The second formulation (below) is about how each person, each 'rational agent,' is an end, never merely a means to an end. That means that LIFE, is the basis and root of all moral decision makings. You cannot abuse people, or LIFE, as a means to your own end, and you must consider people as an end in themselves. So the basis of your decisions will always be people or LIFE.

The second formulation

The second formulation (or Formula of the End in Itself) holds that "the rational being, as by its nature an end and thus as an end in itself, must serve in every maxim as the condition restricting all merely relative and arbitrary ends".[55] The principle dictates that you "[a]ct with reference to every rational being (whether yourself or another) so that it is an end in itself in your maxim", meaning that the rational being is "the basis of all maxims of action" and "must be treated never as a mere means but as the supreme limiting condition in the use of all means, i.e., as an end at the same time".[63]

The second formulation is simply about how we have an duty to people, which requires we follow universal maxims, or rules, or statements, that were constructed by placing ourselves in all the people's shoes, and considering each one as an end, or EQUALLY valuable to YOU, and EACH OTHER. So you always act in a way that produces the best result. Because each person is an end, they are the same, and so have an equal value. And because you are living universally, you are placing yourself in everyone's positions, and seeing the results/outcomes of living a certain way. If living a certain way, leads to a horrendous outcome, if everyone were to do it, then don't do that, its not permitted.

The third formulation

The third formulation (Formula of Autonomy) is a synthesis of the first two and is the basis for the "complete determination of all maxims". It says "that all maxims which stem from autonomous legislation ought to harmonize with a possible realm of ends as with a realm of nature".[55] In principle, "So act as if your maxims should serve at the same time as the universal law (of all rational beings)", meaning that we should so act that we may think of ourselves as "a member in the universal realm of ends", legislating universal laws through our maxims (that is, a code of conduct), in a "possible realm of ends".[64] None may elevate themselves above the universal law, therefore it is one's duty to follow the maxim(s).

So this the basis, and heart of Kant's Moral Philosophy, which is developing and living by Categorical Imperative. To define Categorical Imperative: Imperative means something that ought to be done, or should be done. Imperative, is something important that is not up to question, but absolutely necessary. Categorical, is a category, essentially, in this context, a rule. So essentially it is making rules about how we out to live, and Kant explains what he sees and understand what makes, defines and determines the rules that make sense to him. I agree with all of the basic principles and rules shared by Kant. Because I can see where he is coming from, and what he is trying to create or say. And as the reader may have notice, it is not something new per se, because we have many references and saying which speak to the same point, such as placing yourself in the shoes of another, and Jesus's golden rule of do onto others as you would have them do onto you, or Love thy neighbor as thyself. I appreciate Kant's use of the word duty, because I see that when you realize that living a certain way would harm others, that you do have a duty or obligation to act/change differently, and to at least start investigating whether there is another way. This reminds me of Mill's Utilitarianism. I could write on Mill's next....

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to when I see that living/acting a certain way could lead to a harmful outcome, to not immediately investigate alternative ways of acting/living that would create a better outcome, and ideally, the one outcome that would be best or ideal.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to not use my ability to place myself in the shoes of another person, to see how living and acting in a certain way, would not be permissible because of the large scale harm it would cause if everyone were to live/act that way, and that there really is no difference between ONE person living/acting that harmful way, and MANY people living/acting that harmful way, except that when it is MANY it is more obvious because there are MANY, yet each individually are participating in the same harm as ONE person would, and thus I would have an imperative to act to change how I live/act, and to at least start with investigating alternative ways of acting and living, if I do not see any alternatives right now, because there is an ideal outcome where EVERYONE wins and benefits, and so it would be best to figure out and learn how to create the ideal outcome.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to consider people or LIFE, as a means to my own personal ends, instead of considering each person and each form of life as equals, or ends, and they must be considered with the same consideration as I consider myself as a form of life, or as an end, that way my personal ends, do not supersede or come before other people, or forms of life, because they are just as much a form of life, or an end, as I am. Thus the statement the MEANS justify the end is not valid, because people are ends in themselves, and if we consider them as only means to our own ends, then we create a dysfunctional and destructive world of pure and free reign Abuse.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself  to not see that I have a duty to live in a way that considers everyone universally, as one, and equally as life, and that to live otherwise would be a failing of my duty, and would be less than what I am capable of, and the nature of life, and the nature of my being and the fabric of my existence.

I commit myself to be dutiful, to fulfill my duty to myself, to life, to consider all as equals and one, as an end, as a form of life, equally as I am a form of life or an end myself.

I commit myself to use my ability to place myself in the shoes of others, to see universally, how a single action or way of being would impact existence/universe/world as a whole, and thus use that as a guide on how I should act, and to also use that as a tool to create a world that is truly best for all, where each one has the same level of understanding that I have attained, and live in the same way that I wish to live of considering all as one and equal, and living equally as one.

Sunday, October 5, 2014

Our Magical Brain Day 183

Neuroscience. The science of studying the human physical brain. Its kind of firm, slightly soft, but mostly firm, if you touch one. The brain is made of tiny cells, like your other body parts. The picture above is one shape of these cells. The cell is alive. The cells requires, food, oxygen, and it also poops. It also has a job to do. Each cell can send an electrical signal, induced by a physical movement that creates a chemical reaction, producing electricity, that results in another physical movement that creates another chemical reaction, that is a signal to cell that is connected.

Each cell can have many neighbors. They may connect to 1 or more neighbors. Their neighbors connect to another neighbor. They all connect to each other through a neighbor. Each thing you know, like a word is represented by at least one of these cells. So imagine, the job of one cell is to send a signal when you use the word 'THE.' So every time you use the word THE the cell tells its neighbor that you require the word THE, so to use it in the sentence in the 'right way.' So the neighbor tells its neighboring cells, until the message reaches the cells that are in charge of making sentences. So the job of some cells is just to relay the message. And the cells have to work as groups, or as a team. One cell is not enough to control all the functions related to the uses of one word. You actually need a team of cells.

So if you look at all the words on the page. All the cells responsible for each word were activated. So you have, hundred, thousands, maybe tens of thousands, or more of cells at work here in this moment. And they are all eating and shitting all the time. So you have other cells that bring them food and liquids, and clean the waste.

One cell can grow and change its shape and thus its neighbors. One cell may needs to signal another neighbor, and getting to this new neighbor takes time. An old neighbor has an older relationship. Moving next to a new neighbor will lead to a new connection. The more a cell gets to work with and thus know a new neighbor, the closer they become, and they soon become old pals.

Sometimes cells die. Other cells may come in and take their responsibility, which does take time. Also, sometimes cells move away from one neighbor, because it wasn't relevant to the job anymore. To rebuild that old connection takes time.

Some cells are very long, and some are much shorter. Some connect to many cells, some connect only to two. They can take various shapes and sizes. But they all need oxygen and food, without that they will die. The body tries to keep the brain cells the most well kept. If there is lack of food, the body tries to give the brain cells more of the food.

Behind every single word you know, there is at least one cell responsible for knowing it, but there are probably much more, like a team. So behind each word you have a team of cells that remember the word, hold its meanings and uses. There are teams of cells for remembering how to speak that word, and how to write that word.

The cells respond to what you tell them. The cells will learn any definition you teach them. The cells remember any words you tell them. Within hours of a new word, the cells have already changed their shapes. And with more time, and more teaching, they remember the word better and better. Soon the cells will become old pals.

Proof of this can be seen when a persons learns an incorrect definition. If a person learns that the word cat means a dog, they learn that. So the amount of effort it takes to learn an incorrect definition is the same effort it takes to learn a correct definition. So why not learn the correct definition the first time, and spend as much time as needed to learn the absolute right definition for all the words in your classes. You then would be fully prepared for your classes, which is the foundation that a person's life is built upon.

Everyone is capable of learning by proof of how your brain learns whatever you teach it. The brain is not able to perceive what is right or wrong for it, but you are able to find out, learn, and thus see what is best or right to learn.

Friday, October 3, 2014

Hidden resistance, hidden Gift Day 182

I wanted to continue with part 2 of resisting M, however what I experience is not resistance, as how I have defined it. A closer word would be a reaction, and more specifically a kind of sad emotion. This is a bit perplexing, but it is here.

I don't see any logical reason, at least with the information I have at present to feel sad when thinking about M. But the mind is layered, and this is the next layer. In my body it does feel deeper. I perceive this as a remorse or regret for the previous layer, all the anger, hatred, desire to win and be on top. So a remorse and regret for who I was, what I did, and how I treated existence. I remind myself that I can't change the past.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to be a ruthless  son of a bitch that only cared about himself and his life.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to not take this existence, my home, in care, respect, and appreciation, by physically and by action taking care of it, showing my respect, and showing my appreciation in how I live each moment.

M reminds me of myself, that ruthless son of a bitch. And I do feel remorse and regret. And I do wish to change. I recognize and appreciate my remorse and regret, because it shows I am still human, or at least I have the potential to become human again. I can still change.

I forgive myself for what I have done in the past, so that I may be strong and focused in the present so that I can create the best future possible for everyone.

When and as I feel remorse or reget- I forgive myself for what I have done in the past and I focused on the present moment to create a future that is best for everyone.

I commit myself to forgive whatever exists in my past, so that I can focus on the present moment, to create the best future possible.

Thank you,

Thursday, October 2, 2014

How NOT to be a winner

 So if you have reached the bottom, hi!
I worked with a point inside of me, and I wanted to find two pictures comparing the eye of the pyramid picture to a picture I saw that showed people fighting to sit on top of a char which sat on a mountain of destruction. I couldn't find that picture but I did find many pictures that spoke on the same point. So I wanted to find two pictures because it represented the symbol within me, where I this point was a desire to sit on top of the pyramid, and I mean this metaphorically, however, as you see in the photos, we humans live this metaphor out in the real world.

First off, notice how the animal and plants are not in a relationship of hierarchy like how we perceive the world as. So this pyramid inside of us, and seeing the world as a hierarchy is something we project onto the world. It is something we created, it does not exist naturally. So going backwards in the photos, you should see one photo on networking, and how everything is connected by lines. This is how the animals and plants are related, and so this is how we actually relate to the world and everything.

As you ascend the photos, it essentially depicts that the pyramids neglect reality, and life, meaning, that the one on top destroys and conquers all, leaving a wake of destruction.
This is how our religions are structured and our economy or money system is structured.

So I literally had a conversation with myself, where I asked myself why did I want to sit on top of the pyramid, and immediately an answer came up. I wrote it down, and I immediately said how I did not really want or believe in the thing this thought claims. And I wrote what I actually stood for. I repeated this several times until everything came out and I wrote the correction. I essentially said I wanted power, women, freedom, more time, and have more things. So I wrote my corrections, which was pretty cool, because it was stern and almost commonsensical or obvious, I want to say. So that to want more leads to trouble, and that I cannot have more freedom or time than any other human being, so I got all the time and freedom I will ever have. I can only have one woman, and its not about sex, but about building a RELATIONSHIP. And simply, I did not believe that sitting on top of the pyramid would give me any more power, which it won't, I have all the power I will ever have, here as myself as a human being.

At the end there was nothing left, no desire, no statement. Except in collecting the photos and writing this blog there was resistance, which indicates what? That I should be doing this, because it must mean its important, not only for me, but for everyone! This must be a primary system, something we ALL have within us. We all have the desire to sit on top of the pyramid, when really its just sitting on top a pile of shit or destruction. That's not what we want, instead we want to be one point among a infinite number of points, that stand its position gladly, in who it is and how it is, realizing it serves a balancing point in the grand scheme of things. That's who we really are. We are human being, only one type of an animal or form or being on the planet, which have billions of forms on it. We are only one type. And we must honor our type and position, because right now we are messing things up for everyone, because we are trying to be more than our type, and all the other forms that exist. We have created a separation, a battle field with and of existence. We fight everything. We fight nature, the elements, animals, plants, we enslave and torture, rape and kill. We fight with ourselves and those around us. Everything has lead to destruction. All because of this desire to be more than what we are.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to want to become more than who I am, more than my design, more than my systems, more than my original structure and design, to be more than others, to be more than everything, plants, animals, god, spirit, people, everything, and thus I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to feel content and strive to sit on top of the pyramid even if it means all must die and be destroyed, and so, in essence, I would sit on top a pile of shit.

When and as I see myself desiring to sit on top of existence- I stop and I breathe- and I remind myself how ridiculous that is because I would be waging war and destroying this existence to achieve that.

I commit myself to stand as my individual point, my being, my human physical body, my mind, everything that is me, in humbleness and respect for the life I have been given, and to restore Life to what it is suppose to be and correct my mistakes and actions made in the past, by now working towards the outcome that is best for all.