A Can of Worms . . .

[SOCRATES]

hmmm, I see what DB is asking , and again on starspacers point apathy , individuals like the Dahli Lama surely have/are transcended/ing the primitive (in terms of mans evolution) the I want to hurt you stage. I mean if a person wants to be agression, then live that, its all experience of your life, if thats what you expect or want for yourself. But of course there will be reactions to your actions, but not everyone wants to hurt back.

That is absolutely right fx.

The best route is to ignore malignant entities.

There are several routes to mete out retribution by being totally unresponsive in various ways.

 

[SOCRATES]

1. Socrates, Athenian philosopher born 469 bc
2. Socrates, also known as Bertie, regular poster on T2W

I'm afraid you are confusing the two quite separate entities. I always worry when people start spelling Truth with a capital letter..

You needn't worry yourself peto, you really ought not to.

This is because truth or The Truth is too valuable to give away to anyone just because they happen to ask for it.

This does not mean lies should be offered either.

 

[fxmarkets]

I reminded here of reading The Celestine Prophecy some time back written by a psychologist not sure what his sponsoring thoughts were behind the book and it was critiqued as being "Fast food of spiritualism" but as the author based his book on its hinting at MASS conscious awareness around the world that people are accelerating their evolution of true self as energy beings vibrating at different levels, seeking connection with energy ,transforming.

hmm a different can of worms maybe.

 

[SOCRATES]

I reminded here of reading The Celestine Prophecy some time back written by a psychologist not sure what his sponsoring thoughts were behind the book and it was critiqued as being "Fast food of spiritualism" but as the author based his book on its hinting at MASS conscious awareness around the world that people are accelerating their evolution of true self as energy beings vibrating at different levels, seeking connection with energy ,transforming.

hmm a different can of worms maybe.

Yes I remember reading it on an international flight, and a jolly good read it was, too.

The problem is that not disregarding the concept, the great majority are not able to progress.

See below.

 

[starspacer]

1. Socrates, Athenian philosopher born 469 bc
2. Socrates, also known as Bertie, regular poster on T2W

I'm afraid you are confusing the two quite separate entities. I always worry when people start spelling Truth with a capital letter..

Not so peto, you will note that I quoted the Athenian philosopher and referenced Plato' s Meno. It stands to reason that Bertie cannot be the Socrates referenced in this work.

 

[peto]

This is because truth or The Truth is too valuable to give away to anyone just because they happen to ask for it.

This does not mean lies should be offered either.

In which case, and in the interests of truth (small t) you would do well to admit to or correct the inaccuracies of some of your earlier posts. An apology for breaking site rules in your attack on me would not be completely out of place either.

 

[fxmarkets]

Yes, interesting read, slightly more weight applied or greater interst from myself ,in the sense that it was written by a conventially trained psychologist writting his "truth,belief,direction,discovery" maybe, I got the sense that he dumbed it down slightly so as to be taken as a potential work of fiction to protect himself from conventional thinkers or hmmm, its like he wants to scream it out but chose to hold back in some way.

lets face it he didnt want the tag weirdo to be able to be so easily pronounced . but if it was critiqued as fast food of spiritualism for the masses ,then, he's done doing the job well and reaching out to the masses. No bad thing. Exactly whats needed.

 

[SOCRATES]

No, I do not respond to individuals who make hissing noises and pass them off as replies.

 

[frugi]

To quote Socrates in the Meno: "[O]ne cannot seek for what he knows, and it seems equally impossible for him to seek for what he does not know. For what a man knows he cannot seek, since he knows it; and what he does not know he cannot seek, since he does not even know for what to seek".

I wonder if Donald Rumsfeld was a fan?

Starspacer,

Indeed an interesting view with regard to apathy. I don't think apathy wishes harm on anyone, rather it acknowledges then ignores it. Is witnessing and thus in some ways allowing something to happen without reacting against it tantamount to wishing or condoning it? Perhaps inactions, too, speak louder than words and can imply motive.

 

[starspacer]

Interesting viewpoints. Do you have any evidence to support either ot them?

To paraphrase Raymond Lloyd Richmond, writing in A Guide to Psychology and its Practice, even though this might seem like an obviously simple point, many persons still have a deep reluctance to grasp it: Anger is a common human emotion. We all feel it. And we feel it more often than we like to admit.

But before going any further, we need to make a clear distinction between anger and feeling hurt or irritated.

We all feel hurt or irritated when someone or something obstructs our needs or desires. Anger, though, in its technical sense refers to the desire to “get even with”—that is, to take revenge on—the cause of the hurt.

For example, when another car suddenly cuts in front of you on the road, adrenaline pumps into your bloodstream. Your heart rate jumps. Your blood pressure surges. These things, however, are just immediate fight-or-flight physiological responses to a perceived threat.

But then, as a psychological reaction to these immediate physical responses, indignation and animosity toward the other driver overrun your mind. You honk your horn. You scream profanities. You give a dirty look. And there you have it: anger. Anger, therefore, is the wish for harm or bad or evil to come upon someone who—in your eyes—has injured you.

So the psychological process is clear and simple. If a person hurts you, then, in your anger, you want to hurt him back, just as you have been hurt.
Anger can also be expressed indirectly. If something like a traffic jam, for example, leaves you feeling tense and frustrated, then what do you do? Maybe you go home, find some petty thing out of order, and take it out on your family. Or maybe you go to a bar, maneuver someone into offending you, and get into a fight. Either way you vent your frustrations at the traffic jam by hurting innocent persons—after first manipulating circumstances so that you can believe in your own mind that these persons have somehow hurt you and deserve to suffer for it.

And so there are far better ways to cope with hurt and insult than with anger, because anger itself acts like a poison in your own heart that ultimately degrades the quality of your own life as much as it hurts the life of another person.

So the first step in learning a healthy response to feelings of hurt and insult is simply to acknowledge that you’re hurt.

This is not as easy as it sounds.

For example, when you get angry you don’t really allow yourself to feel your inner hurt. All you can think about is your desire to get revenge. In essence, your outbursts of rage paradoxically hide your inner feelings of vulnerability, so you never recognize the hurt you’re feeling that triggers your hostile reaction. All the bitterness and hostility is a big puff of smoke, an emotional fraud. It hardens your heart toward others so that you can seal off your own emotional pain.
So, this is the essence of Socrates advice to peto to"[m]ake a really big effort, and think deeply about all this, as deep as you can go, and see what conclusion you are able to arrive at..."

 

[SOCRATES]

Yes, interesting read, slightly more weight applied or greater interst from myself ,in the sense that it was written by a conventially trained psychologist writting his "truth,belief,direction,discovery" maybe, I got the sense that he dumbed it down slightly so as to be taken as a potential work of fiction to protect himself from conventional thinkers or hmmm, its like he wants to scream it out but chose to hold back in some way.

lets face it he didnt want the tag weirdo to be able to be so easily pronounced . but if it was critiqued as fast food of spiritualism for the masses ,then, he's done doing the job well and reaching out to the masses. No bad thing. Exactly whats needed.

fx, if you think for one minute even a fictionalised version of real concepts made palatable for consumption by the masses is going to succeed in raising levels universal awareness, you have more faith than I have, that's a fact.

 

[SOCRATES]

Even though this might seem like an obviously simple point, many persons still have a deep reluctance to grasp it: Anger is a common human emotion. We all feel it. And we feel it more often than we like to admit.

But before going any further, we need to make a clear distinction between anger and feeling hurt or irritated.

We all feel hurt or irritated when someone or something obstructs our needs or desires. Anger, though, in its technical sense refers to the desire to “get even with”—that is, to take revenge on—the cause of the hurt.

For example, when another car suddenly cuts in front of you on the road, adrenaline pumps into your bloodstream. Your heart rate jumps. Your blood pressure surges. These things, however, are just immediate fight-or-flight physiological responses to a perceived threat.

But then, as a psychological reaction to these immediate physical responses, indignation and animosity toward the other driver overrun your mind. You honk your horn. You scream profanities. You give a dirty look. And there you have it: anger. Anger, therefore, is the wish for harm or bad or evil to come upon someone who—in your eyes—has injured you.

So the psychological process is clear and simple. If a person hurts you, then, in your anger, you want to hurt him back, just as you have been hurt.
Anger can also be expressed indirectly. If something like a traffic jam, for example, leaves you feeling tense and frustrated, then what do you do? Maybe you go home, find some petty thing out of order, and take it out on your family. Or maybe you go to a bar, maneuver someone into offending you, and get into a fight. Either way you vent your frustrations at the traffic jam by hurting innocent persons—after first manipulating circumstances so that you can believe in your own mind that these persons have somehow hurt you and deserve to suffer for it.

And so there are far better ways to cope with hurt and insult than with anger, because anger itself acts like a poison in your own heart that ultimately degrades the quality of your own life as much as it hurts the life of another person.

So the first step in learning a healthy response to feelings of hurt and insult is simply to acknowledge that you’re hurt.

This is not as easy as it sounds.

For example, when you get angry you don’t really allow yourself to feel your inner hurt. All you can think about is your desire to get revenge. In essence, your outbursts of rage paradoxically hide your inner feelings of vulnerability, so you never recognize the hurt you’re feeling that triggers your hostile reaction. All the bitterness and hostility is a big puff of smoke, an emotional fraud. It hardens your heart toward others so that you can seal off your own emotional pain.
So, this is the essence of Socrates advice to peto to"[m]ake a really big effort, and think deeply about all this, as deep as you can go, and see what conclusion you are able to arrive at..."

Yes, you are absolutely correct once again.

What you omit to mention is that these angry responses are the product ot the Reactive Mind.
The Reactive Mind is stimulated and driven by emotions. It does not reason at all, it just responds.

The Logical, or Analytical Mind is driven by logical deduction and reasoning, which is the one I always use.

This is why I am able to remain super cool and deliver replies that serve to infuriate, whether justifiably or not.

 

[fxmarkets]

lol. socrates, do I have faith in that? hmmm well if it stimulates a number then its better for it for being written I guess, we are talking evolution of mankind on one hand but we live in times of instant aquirement of all required pleased, right here right now. I'm sure many would of read it tossed it aside and umm'd and rrrr'd and forgotten it, just not their time maybe, incoming pollution is too strong. Controllers of society deffinately know what buttons to push to "generally" yield result X of the people. At the moment.

 

[starspacer]

I reminded here of reading The Celestine Prophecy some time back written by a psychologist not sure what his sponsoring thoughts were behind the book and it was critiqued as being "Fast food of spiritualism" but as the author based his book on its hinting at MASS conscious awareness around the world that people are accelerating their evolution of true self as energy beings vibrating at different levels, seeking connection with energy ,transforming.

hmm a different can of worms maybe.

Yes, this brings to mind a poem by Jack Spirko. I looked it up and reads as follows:

The stars shimmer brightly
Two men speak of them
One speaks of science
One speaks of dreams
I stand quietly and listen
One says they are but balls of gas
Giant Masses of nuclear fusion
That is all
The other says they are lights of hope
A symbol of how little we are
The very essence of existence
Again the scientist speaks
Truly we must both regret
That we will never reach them
In our lifetime
The dreamer responds,
No I've already been there
I smile and still say nothing
The Stars now look different

 

[SOCRATES]

lol. socrates, do I have faith in that? hmmm well if it stimulates a number then its better for it for being written I guess, we are talking evolution of mankind on one hand but we live in times of instant aquirement of all required pleased, right here right now. I'm sure many would of read it tossed it aside and umm'd and rrrr'd and forgotten it, just not their time maybe, incoming pollution is too strong. Controllers of society deffinately know what buttons to push to "generally" yield result X of the people. At the moment.

FX, there is a paperback I recommend you should read, I am sure you would enjoy it and find it interesting.

The title is The Technology of Political Control., written in 1977 by Carol ackroyd, Karen Margolis, Jonathan Rosenhead, Tim shallice. Penguin Paperback, ISBN 0140219439

It is as valid today in the concepts explained therein as it was when it was written.

It explains how the herd is controlled and misdirected and dumbed down.

Recommended reading for deep thinkers.

 

[fxmarkets]

cheers, for the recco socrates, have you ever read operation mind control ? written in the 1970's if i remember, CIA effects on US citizens to control, I have a copy not yet finished, but apparently quite rare in the sense that Mrs FX put it on Ebay, and it was being bid up from day one, hmmm odd I thought , retailing second hand in excess of £100.00 apparently still carries weight after being assessed YES very possible by modern psychiatry.

 

[dbphoenix]

Even though this might seem like an obviously simple point, many persons still have a deep reluctance to grasp it: Anger is a common human emotion. We all feel it. And we feel it more often than we like to admit.

But before going any further, we need to make a clear distinction between anger and feeling hurt or irritated.

We all feel hurt or irritated when someone or something obstructs our needs or desires. Anger, though, in its technical sense refers to the desire to “get even with”—that is, to take revenge on—the cause of the hurt.

For example, when another car suddenly cuts in front of you on the road, adrenaline pumps into your bloodstream. Your heart rate jumps. Your blood pressure surges. These things, however, are just immediate fight-or-flight physiological responses to a perceived threat.

But then, as a psychological reaction to these immediate physical responses, indignation and animosity toward the other driver overrun your mind. You honk your horn. You scream profanities. You give a dirty look. And there you have it: anger. Anger, therefore, is the wish for harm or bad or evil to come upon someone who—in your eyes—has injured you.

So the psychological process is clear and simple. If a person hurts you, then, in your anger, you want to hurt him back, just as you have been hurt.
Anger can also be expressed indirectly. If something like a traffic jam, for example, leaves you feeling tense and frustrated, then what do you do? Maybe you go home, find some petty thing out of order, and take it out on your family. Or maybe you go to a bar, maneuver someone into offending you, and get into a fight. Either way you vent your frustrations at the traffic jam by hurting innocent persons—after first manipulating circumstances so that you can believe in your own mind that these persons have somehow hurt you and deserve to suffer for it.

And so there are far better ways to cope with hurt and insult than with anger, because anger itself acts like a poison in your own heart that ultimately degrades the quality of your own life as much as it hurts the life of another person.

So the first step in learning a healthy response to feelings of hurt and insult is simply to acknowledge that you’re hurt.

This is not as easy as it sounds.

For example, when you get angry you don’t really allow yourself to feel your inner hurt. All you can think about is your desire to get revenge. In essence, your outbursts of rage paradoxically hide your inner feelings of vulnerability, so you never recognize the hurt you’re feeling that triggers your hostile reaction. All the bitterness and hostility is a big puff of smoke, an emotional fraud. It hardens your heart toward others so that you can seal off your own emotional pain.
So, this is the essence of Socrates advice to peto to"[m]ake a really big effort, and think deeply about all this, as deep as you can go, and see what conclusion you are able to arrive at..."

And what does any of this have to do with your assertions regarding the alleged relationship between apathy and anger?

 

[starspacer]

Starspacer,

Indeed an interesting view with regard to apathy. I don't think apathy wishes harm on anyone, rather it acknowledges then ignores it. Is witnessing and thus in some ways allowing something to happen without reacting against it tantamount to wishing or condoning it? Perhaps inactions, too, speak louder than words and can imply motive.

I absolutely disagree frugi.
Apathy, greed and ignorance are all linked. According to Foldvary, Greed depends on the absence of sympathy, and it benefits from ignorance about a social problem. He states that apathy can be reduced if there is less ignorance and less greed. Ignorance is reinforced by apathy, since apathetic people don't care to obtain the knowledge which would reduce their apathy. Greed exploits the ignorance of the majority who do not have sufficient sympathy to counter the greedy faction.

Dick Cheney & Haliburton really sums up this interrelationship best.

 

[SOCRATES]

cheers, for the recco socrates, have you ever read operation mind control ? written in the 1970's if i remember, CIA effects on US citizens to control, I have a copy not yet finished, but apparently quite rare in the sense that Mrs FX put it on Ebay, and it was being bid up from day one, hmmm odd I thought , retailing second hand in excess of £100.00 apparently still carries weight after being assessed YES very possible by modern psychiatry.

No I have not read it, but I am not surprised at any of the antics of modern psychiatry, as they are most likely to be behind some of these ideas. They are not limited to the western world either. The Soviet Bloc had an assortment of rotters of this ilk in their day too.

You remember the Chernobyl disaster ?

This was a nuclear power station specially built to power huge transmitters beamed at the whole of Europe as a footprint and beaming continuous low frequency waves in an attempt to influence the mental state of everyone on this side of the Iron Curtain.

Continued exposure to this kind of persistent frequency is very dangerous to health.

 

[starspacer]

And what does any of this have to do with your assertions regarding the alleged relationship between apathy and anger?

DB, I believe I have answered your question with my post to frugi.