Good stuff and bad stuff

[orgaelin]

Hi everyone, I'm back! That's right, raise your crucifixes and your wooden stakes!

Don't have much time so I won't be engaging in my usual lengthy debates. Keeping it short but sweet...

I'm pondering the subject of games and life. We all know roughly that games have certain basic rules that are held in common to all. For example, there must be two opposing sides with opposing goals, and there needs to be a fair chance of either side winning.

Why do we play games? For entertainment. A boxing match wouldn't be so exciting if both men were trying to knock the one of them out. It's the fight, the challenge, the competition that makes it entertaining.

Where am I going with all this? Well, games are fun even though they involve struggle and hardship.

The question is; to what extent is life a game? If there were no struggles, no drama, no difficulties to face or challenges of any sort, there would be no game, and thus no fun. Life would be boring.

And then you have to consider how that impacts religion... if heaven is this wonderous place where nothing ever goes wrong, where no-one struggles and everyone is good and no bad things ever happen... wouldn't you rather just die?!

In the short term heaven might be great. Give it a while and you'll get bored of 'perfection'... you'd probably gather a bunch of like-minded heavenfolk and rebell, fall to earth, and start this same show all over again!

The overall point here is that heaven/good is just one team in the game of life. The other team is hell/bad and to be in either one would suck really badly. The best place to be is right here on earth, where we can live a fairly well-balanced life where both good and bad things can happen to keep us busy. Sure you keep fighting for and aspiring to good, as that's what the game is all about - the fight. But ultimately you don't want to win because then the game is over, the end.

Does anyone agree?

[crayola]

I agree. We must have an oppositon to keep us inquiring into what is true and false. If we were in heaven and nothing else on the plate but "vegetables", eventually there would have to be a stampede somewhere,, or something like that.

So.. lets hear it for the meat and potatoes crowd ! Yea!

[Technosoul]

As Ram Dass once said "Life is the dance". When Clay (mr X) won those fighting games it was because he knew how to dance while boxing. Hmmm?

However bordom is a created state that could not be unless you first experience some "rush" or high that we might call "pleasure or excitement". Once you experience the abnormal state of feeling super good then feeling normal again would be a come-down, it would become boring relative to the more highly stemulated experience it is now contrasted with.

Now in order to feel pleasure agian you must get some pain in your life, so you have something that would make the normal state of boredom a relief and thus a pleasure by contrast once you overcome the pain. So what happens is we get into this ping pong game where we bounce back and forth between pleasure and pain and we must keep the cycle going in order to experience the next high, like a drug addict. In such a case normal feeling is eather pleasre compared to greater pain or boredom (bordom?) compared to hyper feelings of stemuation called "feeling super good". So the norm more or less vanishes as being real normality. (you will have to think deeply about this to comprehend my theory). The state of total non-motivation however is suggestive of the perfect environment.

Here is a science experiment.

How does the left finger on your right hand feel? Chance are you would say it feels nothing at all, that is because it would be in a normal state which state is not aware of it's self feeling-wise. Now if you burn your finger on a stove it feels pain (not normal) but then if you stick the painful finger in some ice water it feels good by constrast (pleasure). Which is also not the normal state of not feeling anything.

We are under the idea however that life is "feeling". If we don't feel something we think we are deadheads, so to speak, and not really experiencing life.

However it the wide road of extreme feelings destructive and the middle road of non-feeling more positive? Is the ping pong ball better off when it is not motivated by being knocked back and forth over the center net and it comes to rest in peace?

Is it possible to view the norm not as being boring relative to the some abnormal high? Have we overlooked our true potential for being normal by our belief in the deceptions of some state (temorary as it is) that is more exciting and attractive?

Whatcha think? (but first think deeply about this theory).

Technosoul.

[orgaelin]

Technosoul, old buddy old pal, if you lived in the UK I'd demand you come over and share some beers and ideas. Almost everything you say seems so inline with my own thinking!

OK. The whole thing is a little tricky. Just for clarity: we have two opposite extremes 1)Good, and 2)Bad. Then in the middle we have 3)Balance...

Your question is where in these three is the right, or natural state, right? I mean, you're saying why does any of them have to be judged in accordance with the others, and isn't there some level where things are just right...

Well, here's the really tricky explanation... Let's say it's Monday and I go out and kill a man. Then Tuesday comes and I give my own life to save another man's life. On Monday I would be a pretty bad guy, but to anyone on Tuesday who didn't know about Monday I would seem like a very good man.

What about to someone who knew about the events of both days? That person would probably believe that, overall, I was pretty levelled out - not exactly good or bad, or a bit of both.

The point is that balance at any moment is different from balance over time. So what is unbalanced right now might well be perfectly balanced if you take it's position over two weeks into account.

What I'm getting at is that just sitting there in the middle, in perfect balance, is not the ideal position any more than being at either of the opposite extremes. You have to be able to be bad sometimes and good sometimes, and it is only through this variation that we find the happy medium. To go directly to the happy medium, by being in permanent and total balance all the time, is no better than being totally good or totally bad.

I've been interrupted half way through writing this post and lost my train of thought so if it seems a little disjointed, well now you know why!

There is a really good way to picture this visually. Perfection (the state so long sought after by all mankind) is something people hope to achieve but don't begin to understand. It lies not in being always good, or always bad, or even in being always balanced...

Imagine an equilateral triangle (equal on all sides), and each of the point of it represents one of either good, bad, or balanced. Perfection lies exactly between these points - an equal distance between all three. But time is an important factor...

Let's say I was having an affair in my marriage. Right now I'd be a fairly bad person for that. But if I spent the rest of my life being good and doing good, then overall I would not be a bad person. So whatever a person or thing is has to be judged, not just by the present moment, but by its changing state over time.

To visualise this, imagine we add another point to our triangle and turn it into a 3-sided pryamid. The new point is to represent the end of time. Imagine this last point at the top, and the bottom is the beginning of time. As time goes on and on towards the top, or end, figures balance out. Like how the more times you toss a coin the closer to 50/50 it gets for the times it has been on each side.

I believe that balance is something that works independently of everything. No-one except Charles Manson would argue that Charles Manson was a very good person, but give him a few more lifetimes and the law of Karma (which is basically what we're talking about here) will set him right. The universe balances itself, over time. And however bad things are now or however bad they get at any time in your future, you should find comfort in the knowledge that things will right themselves, and that bad times turn to good, and by the end of time you will have had a fun ride, having visited all four corners of the Great Pyramid and lived your lifetimes to the fullest, whether you intended to or not.

Woah. Deep! Gonna quit while I'm a head!

~ Org. ;o)

[Technosoul]

You mentioned Charles Manson as he would be symoblic of what we think of as an evil person, but he was also deeply into philosophy and no doubt he would also be interesting to have a chat with over a mug of beer. He is not good at writing but have you ever read his philosophy about life? I have posted some of it in the following link - check it out and let me know what you think about how his mind works. Might be worth the trip because if we did not know he had influenced others to murder someone he might still be touring around with people like the Beachboys teaching his philosophy and people would be of a different opinion about his status as a bad or good person.

http://www.atwa.info/thought.htm

Along about that same time in history we had President Nixon, he got impeached for doing something bad (or left office to avoid impeachment). But clearly he was not a totally bad person because of that one event, if we examine his policy making with China, if we watched him on Johnny Carson joking around and playing the piano, we might see another side of the old bum that is kinda nice.

Now if we assume the judgement seat we often just look at the most dramatic events in the person's life. What seems to "stand out" as their best known activity. But if we said "let he who is perfect among you take the judgement seat", we would have a empty chair, if everyone was honest. Because the "law" is like a sword that is sharp enough to seperate the two faces. One rather odd case we find in the story about Robin Hood, stealing from the rich and giving the money to the poor while enjoying the "merry life" of being a pirate. Does the ending justify the crime - does the overall conduct balance out everything such that Robin Hood could be pointed too as a proper role model?

Now in your break down we (I) get the idea that if a person does not experience the ways of the "wayward son" and the "return home" then he would not be as knowledgable and as informed (via learning) as in the case of the son who never made that adventure to "walk on the wild side". Hmmm? In Eastern philosophy we learn about the high road and the low road, about the school of hard knocks and the school of playing it safe. In that philosophy both roads end up at the same place (whatever that is?).

And then we have simply what one could call our perception. In that perception the "truth" (that unregulated knowing) is always relative to the moment at hand. Truth and or logic is always relative to the moment at hand and is subject to change if a different circumstance pops up next time we experience an different "moment at hand". We do not harvest in the springtime and plant seeds in the late fall (logically) however if we had some sort of drastic weather change then that "standard truism" would no longer be "true". (because each moment has it's own determination - depending).

Later I will re-visit this topic with some other ideas.

PS - don't worry folks - reading the Charles Manson philosophy will not hynotically make you go out and kill people - (I least I hope not) - but who knows for sure? Enter at your own risk - ho ho ho.

Technosoul.

[orgaelin]

I'm getting freaked out here Techno. You and I are like mind-twins or something!

I visited the ATWA site years ago and read loads and totally don't think Manson's half the bad guy he is supposed to be. Are YOU responsible for that site?!

Here's something I've always found to be true: the best philosophies are the most oppressed and hated. If you want to find great answers to lifes mysteries, look to the people or organisations that society hates, just like Manson.

I have to say, I did use him as an example because of his well-known "evil" nature, but I felt bad as I was writing it, because I knew I was just... I shouldn't have used him as an example when I don't really think of him in that way.

I'm freaked out Techno. Freaked out!

[castille]

Heh, so if the best philosophies are the most hated and oppressed, does it mean Nazism is the best philosophy, since its hated (by the West), and oppressed (banned in Europe)?


But to drag this back to the topic, yes I believe life does need struggle in order to break out of a monotone. That is precisely why we can NEVER have a Utopian society - people would be bored.

[Technosoul]

No I did not create the Charles Manson webpage and presently do not have a personal webpage that is still active. (had three of them in the past but not about Manson).

When we look at nature which I think is the most absolute reality possibe to witness in it's orginial un-domesticated state - we see all kinds of violence and other exciting things happening. In our perception a flood would be bad, perhaps even judgemental. But in fact we might also comprehend that in the long term all those extreme weather conditions are important in the over-all sense, and part of the continued balance needed to keep things proper over the ages. Like stirring fried chicken so it don't stick to the pan and burn on one side.

In the long term what would improve the chances for humans to survive for a long time to come on planet earth? Would it be massive overpopulation due to love and peace? Or would it be better to keep the population in check by wars, illnessnes, and gay marrages? (even if we are unknowingly putting a cap on population growth with our WMDs and speedy traffic vehicles). Judgements are somewhat non-important unless we can see the "whole show".

When they asked Saddam if he really thought he could win a war with the USA superpower (a question asked of him before Bush gave the order to attack) he said "If I survive I have won". Now that was an odd answer but it showed he understood something deeper then most people do which is that if we live through an bad experience and come out on the other side in one peice you have "made it". Which is what it is all about when you get down to the basics.

Next time I will add more opinion on this topic. However before logging off I would like to state that I am not personally advocating any one philosophy, religion, or concept, not even those I write here, but rather, only wish to look everything over without ever bonding my identity to any of them. It is the total texture of the whole complexity that most interesting - and I would prefer the Dolphin culture over being part of the Shark culture because they look like they have more fun. But I agree with him on one thing which is "be the tree". So I came up with a new saying which I will now introduce - here it is..... "Be the limb instead of the one going out on the limb". I should send Shirley a copy of that, eh?

But here is an interesting question for u-all.

If you were God and was looking down at the world as if it were a movie, what kind of movie would ou rent for the weekend.

1. A movie about some people sitting around all day looking at computer or reading a book.

2. A movie where those on the stage were doing exciting things, adventures, romances, full of sex and violence and challenges.

If life is a stage, and we each are playing a part ... then we better do a good job at entertaining the higher-ups who are watching the show, otherwise they will get bored and our little movie house will close down due to a lack of interest.

Hmmm?

Technosoul.

[SlySpy]

If you were God and was looking down at the world as if it were a movie, what kind of movie would ou rent for the weekend.

1. A movie about some people sitting around all day looking at computer or reading a book.

2. A movie where those on the stage were doing exciting things, adventures, romances, full of sex and violence and challenges.

If life is a stage, and we each are playing a part ... then we better do a good job at entertaining the higher-ups who are watching the show, otherwise they will get bored and our little movie house will close down due to a lack of interest.

Hmmm?

Technosoul.

I highly doubt that an all-benevolent God, if such a thing could logically exist, would create us for the sole purpose of his amusement. Sounds kinda selfish, dontcha say?
I also doubt that an ominscient God would find our actions amusing, since he knows what all of our actions will be anyway.

[orgaelin]

SlySpy,

The notion Techno is thinking of involves a God who has chosen to create people with free will, so he can not-know what they will do (because an all-powerful God can choose to not-know something, surely) and thus be entertained by the continuing evolution of events over time - a story. He is not selfish in this, because every being he creates gets to enjoy it too. Do you think stage actors think of their audience as selfish? No - they love them!

Techno... sorry, I got confused because you wrote "I have posted some of it in the following link..."

Also, a damn good point. Good and bad can ONLY be judged relatively. I agree that a flood may seem bad, but is essentially good overall. Killing a baby might be bad, but if it was done by a time traveller who knew that baby was the future Hitler then...

Are we actually going so far as to say that, overall, there IS no good and bad, only the continuing interplay of events that always eventually work out well in the long run?

As for Saddam, I think he's just a puppet in a very predictable drama. It's all part of the world power game.

I think we're touching on too many subjects all at once here!

~ Org.

[Suburbanite]

The world is not perfect because we enjoy struggle and it provides it, but rather the world is imperfect because we simply can't be content with repitition.

[orgaelin]

Um... you may need to rearrange that sentence if you want to make any sense!!

I think you're saying the world isn't perfect, and that the reason for that is that we don't like repetition.

Hmmm. I assume then that you're also saying that the world is repetitive, and I assume by "the world" you perhaps mean something along the lines of 'life as we know it'?

You can see I'm having to fill in a lot of gaps here. Would be helpful if you provide more than one sentence next time so I can just get on with replying to you!

What if we did like repetition? Would the world then suddenly be perfect? Is our preference for repetition the sole arbiter of the perfection of life/the world?

I actually agree that it is bad that life is so repetitive, inasmuch as no eternal being could be happy for very long because the number of things one can experience are limited. I happen to believe that is why we die, and then reincarnate as a new person with our previous memories cleared aside... so that we can experience our first kiss, first love, first sky-dive, etc. all over again. It keeps things fun.

~ Org.