Here I’d like to share a communication that I had today on Quora. I added some further elaboration at places while preparing the blog post, you’ll find it in italics so you’ll know it’s an additional comment I wrote for my Blog here.
I share this here to give an example of Why it is important to investigate and re-evaluate our Definitions of Words and principles such as freedom, peace, oneness, equality, and also Why it is important that we develop our communication as human beings and as humanity / society.
Comment:
<<How can one have economic freedom when their personal freedom to
become wealthier is not met? And how can one promote eco-responsibility when
everyone realize that everyone else is doing the exact same thing? (free-rider problems) >>
My perspective:
as we can see in our world, the "freedom to become wealthier" is equal to the "freedom to abuse"
My perspective:
I want to add that, it is only in the current system so, where wealth is defined as ‘power’ and thus the luxury to not care about what others must endure so that I can have my ‘wealth’ and have my ‘power’.
But for instance in an equal money system everyone would in fact have the freedom to be/become wealthier as one explore one's potentials. Wealth can be defined as for instance richness in opportunities, in experiences, in education or career or path of interest, in talents and abilities, research and collaborations, you name it, or even becoming a successful businessman/businesswoman. Wealth would be defined in the context of self-expression, self-development, self-expansion to one's utmost potential as life, and obviously within a system that works-together each one would be in their expression a real contribution to the ‘system’, to 'all', to society, to the world and the future of the world.
Wouldn’t for instance open knowledge for all be true wealth for humanity? Wouldn’t food and shelter and all the basic requirements for a life in dignity met be true wealth for humanity?
So it’s not that ‘wealth’ is ‘bad’, but it’s to re-evaluate how we define and express wealth in the current system/way of life and at what cost.
Comment:
<<It can be, not necessary for it to be always the case. But even
then are you asserting that EMS only supports some form of freedom but not
other forms of freedom that is deemed to be "evil" and
"disharmonious" in your own opinion?>>
My perspective:
The ems supports freedom for all - on the basis of the value of life - which is freedom for life. this means the only 'condition' to anyone's freedom (one being a human or a country or a state) is that it does not harm another/others.
This should actually be common sense within the practicality of human co-existence, yet it is not. I find that we as human beings should investigate how come it isn't.
Comment:
<<If one chooses all the action that doesn't harm another/others then
the freedom of self-destruction also needs to be ruled out since it creates
emotional stress to those who are close to them. Freedom to reject love also
needs to harm others, because of the emotional distress it always brings.
If you only want to focus on the physical damage then the freedom to bullying
can be permitted because it only brings in emotional distress (emotional abuse,
not physical abuse.)
Thus the whole concept of freedom to do as you like without harming others is actually quite flawed when you realize we affect each and everyone of us throughout every stages in life.>>
Thus the whole concept of freedom to do as you like without harming others is actually quite flawed when you realize we affect each and everyone of us throughout every stages in life.>>
My perspective:
Bullying is also harm, as is all kind of imposing one's "power"
unto others. See my perspective on Bullying here: Answer
to Bullying: Why is bullying prevalent in western countries like the United
States?
You write: <<Thus the whole concept of freedom to do as you like without harming others is actually quite flawed when you realize we affect each and everyone of us throughout every stages in life. >>
This is actually fuzzy logic! You are forming your 'conclusion' in a way that 'justifies' why 'freedom for all is not possible' - which is obviously an acceptance of limitation and inferiority, yet it gives one a sense of "power" because one then does 'not have to change' based on the belief that the world cannot change or the human cannot change.
I find, the common sense conclusion to be drawn from the realization that "we affect each and everyone of us throughout every stages in life" is that of realizing of RESPONSIBILITY.
You write: <<Thus the whole concept of freedom to do as you like without harming others is actually quite flawed when you realize we affect each and everyone of us throughout every stages in life. >>
This is actually fuzzy logic! You are forming your 'conclusion' in a way that 'justifies' why 'freedom for all is not possible' - which is obviously an acceptance of limitation and inferiority, yet it gives one a sense of "power" because one then does 'not have to change' based on the belief that the world cannot change or the human cannot change.
I find, the common sense conclusion to be drawn from the realization that "we affect each and everyone of us throughout every stages in life" is that of realizing of RESPONSIBILITY.
Comment:
<<Oh I'm against bullying, for first, I'm queer and have been bullied
because of that. And I do believe that bullying is simply disgusting.
But I'm writing a conclusion to say that freedom that doesn't harm anyone will actually freedom that we have and if we are to accept freedom for all then we all must be prepared to accept the "bad freedom" that comes with it if we are to be consistent and we as a society needs to come up with rules that limit and control that kind of "bad freedom", rather than expecting everyone to follow the "good kind of freedom" while the "bad" kind is left alone and that it will never occur. >>
But I'm writing a conclusion to say that freedom that doesn't harm anyone will actually freedom that we have and if we are to accept freedom for all then we all must be prepared to accept the "bad freedom" that comes with it if we are to be consistent and we as a society needs to come up with rules that limit and control that kind of "bad freedom", rather than expecting everyone to follow the "good kind of freedom" while the "bad" kind is left alone and that it will never occur. >>
My perspective:
Hi, can you please elaborate on the second part of your comment? what is
'bad freedom' - can you give an example and also make a suggestion as to how to
effectively deal with/direct such phenomenon?
Comment:
<<I would be more than happy to.
the "Bad Freedom" I refer to is the exact kind of freedom that harms others as you speak.
In common sense terms, it is easy to classify these bad freedoms. However, as one looks past the "common sense", this becomes a problematic notion.
For example, what is "harm" to others? Emotional distress? Physical distress? Is it a specific kind of distress? What is the intensity?
Without these definitions, the freedom to reject others can be branded the same as freedom to emotionally bully someone as both involves actions that creates emotional distress to the third party.
Even freedoms that doesn't harm anyone; for example the freedom to use drugs (as long as it doesn't harm anyone, realizing it is very easy to harm someone else while using drugs) is still seen as quite problematic in terms of paternalistic view where these people need to be "protected"
The system that is in place to reduce these "bad" freedoms (as accepted by the society) is the system of law. It is not perfect nor can it ever be because as we live, where there is good there must always be a bad. We can try to reduce the amount of bad but in order for the concept of good to exist, there need to be the concept of bad.
Does that sort of make sense? >>
the "Bad Freedom" I refer to is the exact kind of freedom that harms others as you speak.
In common sense terms, it is easy to classify these bad freedoms. However, as one looks past the "common sense", this becomes a problematic notion.
For example, what is "harm" to others? Emotional distress? Physical distress? Is it a specific kind of distress? What is the intensity?
Without these definitions, the freedom to reject others can be branded the same as freedom to emotionally bully someone as both involves actions that creates emotional distress to the third party.
Even freedoms that doesn't harm anyone; for example the freedom to use drugs (as long as it doesn't harm anyone, realizing it is very easy to harm someone else while using drugs) is still seen as quite problematic in terms of paternalistic view where these people need to be "protected"
The system that is in place to reduce these "bad" freedoms (as accepted by the society) is the system of law. It is not perfect nor can it ever be because as we live, where there is good there must always be a bad. We can try to reduce the amount of bad but in order for the concept of good to exist, there need to be the concept of bad.
Does that sort of make sense? >>
My perspective:
Okay,
<<the "Bad Freedom" I refer to is the exact kind of freedom
that harms others as you speak.>>
Exactly. I was just thinking: bad freedom is the freedom to abuse.
So perhaps the question that arises is: what is abuse?
Each one should be able to answer this question in self-honesty: abuse is
that which obstructs life from living, from expressing, from expanding, from
reaching its utmost potential. Abuse would also be that which diminishes, that
which creates dependency and addiction, that which creates fear and mistrust.
We should sit together as humanity and ask ourselves these questions
for-real and discuss answers that are acceptable for all. That is what we are
doing with the Desteni Group and Equal Money is the result of such
considerations and is the proposal of a system that would dedicate itself to
answer these/such questions in practicality, always from the starting-point of
‘best for life’/’best for all’ – and obviously also: all-inclusive.
<<In common sense terms, it is easy to classify these bad freedoms.
However, as one looks past the "common sense", this becomes a
problematic notion.
For example, what is "harm" to others? Emotional distress?
Physical distress? Is it a specific kind of distress? What is the intensity? >>
Yes, exactly, the problem is that common sense is rare in the world as we
know it. So we must investigate what it is that oppresses common sense. What
you are realizing is that ‘when you go past common sense’ you find fear.
Because you find self-interest. That is the manifestation of the ‘separation’
of life in the existence of human beings. So what one tends to do then is cling
on to fear, out of fear, lol, and ‘justify’ that with self-interest, thus
sticking to self-interest even in spite of seeing common sense – which is how
we human beings are recreating our society and the system throughout history.
So here, one could reverse the problem and see a solution. Why not ‘look
past self-interest’ and see common sense? Why not educate our children and our
world towards this perspective of life. I find life would be much more worthy
of living for all if common sense was common.
It’s weird that in essence all we learn at school is linked to fear and
patterns of power-games, and that is exactly the polarity system from which
inevitably emerges abuse. Therefore to stop abuse we must stop the root of it,
which is what we have accepted as world system, as human system, as human
nature and what we call ‘life’.
<<Without these definitions, the freedom to reject others can be branded the same as freedom to emotionally bully someone as both involves actions that creates emotional distress to the third party. >>
Agreed, and such ‘definitions’ or patterns must be addressed, discussed, exposed and explored. What must be seen here also is that we have a world system that has the luxury to in fact reject people, to allow discrimination to the degree of starvation and to even use bullying to brand those that do not comply or do not benefit the system. It is interesting to notice that throughout history, all our systems have been exclusive, have always included some and excluded others. What we need if we are to get to an existence where freedom for all is possible, is an all-inclusive consideration.
Which is what I participate in in the context of the equal money movement.
So such definitions could and should be discussed, and what I have found within
such discussions is that one principle is best for all, and that is the
principle of oneness and equality as a definition of life/living. How would it
look like if we would apply oneness and equality in our ‘way of life’?
Agreed, so here we’d have to look at letting go of a paternalistic view and
getting to an education that stands within the principle of
self-responsibility.
I find we must reform education to be learning from consequences, seeing
and understanding consequence – instead of education being about the ‘morality’
of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ which is in the end is just making a rule our of it, making
rules that everyone loves to break and there you have it – a system where life
is bound to fail, abuse, fall.
Understanding consequence implies seeing and understanding cause and
effect. Here, obviously, a ‘deeper’ self-awareness must be cultivated – ‘man
know thyself’- in terms of understanding
what consequence is: What I accept, what I allow, what I think/speak/do, what I
fear, suppress, or deny, is what I become – is what society becomes, and the
world. In essence however it’s about self, I mean, if one does not have the
self-dignity and self-respect to value their own life, they will not value life
in any one. However such ‘devaluation’, such accepted degradation is mostly due
to conditioned self-definitions, comparison, judgment and self-judgment and the
result of extensive abuse, but people may be able to be assisted and supported
to get to self-forgiveness. We have to let go of our past as humanity, to be
able to find another way and in fact go another way.
So in terms of the need to ‘protect’ life the best way I see is through
education based in self-responsibility, an education that supports the process
of self-realization, the process of self-awareness. I mean we really have to
ask ourselves what we want human evolution to be. What is it currently, where
are we heading to, and can we stop that course. And what will it take to stop
that course. What could be a course that would work for all and would be a
system of life-support.
How would it be if all would understand all consequences, all that we are
facing as humanity and as human beings. How would it be to find out that all our
thoughts and words and deeds had an impact on society, on the world, on the
systems, on life on earth. How would it be to realize that we are all equally
responsible.
<<The system that is in place to reduce these "bad"
freedoms (as accepted by the society) is the system of law. It is not perfect
nor can it ever be because as we live, where there is good there must always be
a bad. We can try to reduce the amount of bad but in order for the concept of
good to exist, there need to be the concept of bad.
Does that sort of make sense? >>
Does that sort of make sense? >>
It does, from the perspective that this is indeed how the system works. It
is a system of polarity and all its derivatives, creations, manifestations are
of polarity.
This however would imply from the perspective of an evolution of consciousness
that we should ask ourselves the question why accept the limitation of polarity
with all its consequences. Why not re-define the ‘good’ beyond polarity. Why
not commit ourselves to find common sense and find ways to express and expand
it in our practical living and world systems.
This obviously would imply a process of ‘man know thyself’, not an easy
process given the veils of brainwashing formed through a system that exploits
life for profit and rules over life through the polarity veil of fear and
desire.
I believe that once we come to common sense, and once we come to our senses
as physical beings on earth, we will realize that ‘law’ can be perfect in terms
of protecting and supporting life. And it must not even be complicated. It can
and should, in my opinion, be so that any man and woman is able to follow the
logic and see the common sense and be able to assess whether it’s best for
all/best for life.
Suggested Reading:
Awareness and Conception in Practical Enlightenment
Check out the Desteni I Process Lite –
a FREE course that will assist humanity to end the disaster of a dysfunctional consciousness.
Check out the Equal Money System –
a solution that can be established in this lifetime to end the disaster of a profit driven system.
a solution that can be established in this lifetime to end the disaster of a profit driven system.
Relevant Blogs to follow:
MUST-READ on Life and Creation:
For support and participation visit:
http://forum.desteni.org
http://equalmoney.org/forum/
http://forum.desteni.org
http://equalmoney.org/forum/
Join the Journey to Life !
Downloadables @ eqafe for FREE:
* Quantum Mind Self Awareness - Step 1 and Step 2 <<< MP3 Downloads
* LifeReview - My Life as a Peace Activist <<< MP3 Download
* The Spirituality of the Snail <<< MP3 Download
* Spirituality Under the Microscope - Volume 2 <<< PDF Download
* How I was able to Hear the Desteni Message <<< PDF Download - Blog Compilation
* What the FAQ in an Equal Money System – Volume 2 <<< PDF Download
* Hell Spoof <<< MP3 Download - Music for Equality
* What makes me Starve in a World of Plenty <<< MP3 Download - Music for Equality
Visit my Blog sites:
http://breath-expression.blogspot.com
http://equal-money-revolution.blogspot.com
http://EarthGlobalReview.wordpress.com
Downloadables @ eqafe for FREE:
* Quantum Mind Self Awareness - Step 1 and Step 2 <<< MP3 Downloads
* LifeReview - My Life as a Peace Activist <<< MP3 Download
* The Spirituality of the Snail <<< MP3 Download
* Spirituality Under the Microscope - Volume 2 <<< PDF Download
* How I was able to Hear the Desteni Message <<< PDF Download - Blog Compilation
* What the FAQ in an Equal Money System – Volume 2 <<< PDF Download
* Hell Spoof <<< MP3 Download - Music for Equality
* What makes me Starve in a World of Plenty <<< MP3 Download - Music for Equality
Visit my Blog sites:
http://breath-expression.blogspot.com
http://equal-money-revolution.blogspot.com
http://EarthGlobalReview.wordpress.com
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen