It’s an achievement to identify and be able to express your core values. How much more of an achievement would it be to recognize that they are there for you, but not to be projected onto others as criteria for acceptance and friendship. While there may be some values that are so distasteful that you can’t abide being in the presence of their owner, by and large accepting others as they are is a prerequisite to getting along in this world, unless being a hermit is your objective.
I can see value in this comment, it does not trigger me, It does not feel like bullying. Could we accept everybody and everything as it is, we might have equanimity and a boring life. Our identity would have gone, alle values would be core values or nothing.
I did not mean to suggest he was bullying. I didn't have that reaction at all. I was responding to what he seemed to be suggesting, that we should honor all value systems equally even if we choose not to hang out with their owner. ILt was a Socratic inquiry.
His comments (two of them now) smack a bit of judgmentalism, and I don't find that useful. I"m putting my soul out there pretty nakedly, and I'm not doing it to be told why I'm "wrong." For all I know, I'm projecting, which is why I asked him about this flat-out. I value his participation and want to clear out any noise that may be there.
By way of counterpoint: Are you good with bullying? Do you believe all values are created equal?
I will also note that you seem to be imputing stuff to me that isn't actually there. I'm not projecting anything onto anyone. I prefer to hang with like-minded people. I think that makes me human. And I see no reason to change that preference. FWIW, I tend to get along with people fine, including ones I don't see eye-to-eye with. This is deep-dive stuff I'm writing about, not social getting-alongness.
Between this comment and your last one, I get the sense that I've gotten on your wrong side somehow. Is that actually the case? It can be hard to read between the virtual lines.
You appeared to be belittling your friend's world view and then abandoning his friendship because of it, as if he is undesirable, gullible, ignorant or simplistic. My counterpoint is that it may work well for him, comfort him, etc. It sounds like your world view is a tougher one, maybe even a bit grim for you. If that's the case, why continue carrying it? Find something more hopeful, uplifting to hope for. Even "I just don't know" leaves more space for your neighbor to occupy. I'm suggesting values are personal, even if they happen to be shared amongst other people, and it's possible to agree to disagree and still get along. I think finding equanimity is partly about coming to terms with others, coming to peace with your most closely held values and also the fact that your neighbor won't precisely share yours, in fact not even your spouse, your child, your parent. Indeed, it's easier to hang with like-minded people, but taking that to it's logical endpoint is closer to an echo-chamber. Perhaps my comments should be posed as a question; does he deserve to lose your friendship because of his evangelical views?
No, I am not in favor of bullying. I don't think there's any place for it in a civil society, even though it appears to be rampant, to one degree or another. Does it make sense that one can make a judgement without being judgemental? I have a couple of treasured friends with very different world views, from whom I have learned a great deal.
I am actually very interested in your views, because we have the same objective. Equinimity may be the best possible state one can achieve in a very tumultous world. I've been on the hunt ever since I crashed out of a beloved professional career where I found all the validation I would ever need, until the work environment became intolerable, made me ill and disabled me.
Irk to train your irk-immune system, your equanimity system.
With all being one, as the saints and you are saying, irking is part of the immune system, the very healthy chain of action and reaction to keep us alive and healthy for long stretches, like being in equanimity at times.
When our immune system aka equanimity is challenged, a inner war is triggered and rages and we get seriously affected or healed.
Should we have serious unbalance in these systems, we might die or at least get seriously harmed.
Without any immune defence, we would have to live in an sterile environment, a irk free environment and this would be little fun and not last very long.
A life in total equanimity for me is like living in a sterile box alone. I do not long and strive for this.
I prefer a fully alert and trained immune system, which needs all kind of stimulatiion/inking.
I do not want to reach that point in life, when eternal equanimity sets in, too early. It is called dying. But this one I would like to embrace with a fully functioning anti irk immune system.
Lovely thoughts. I believe there's a Hindu creation story about how one of their deities created 'otherness' so they wouldn't be bored.
Josef, I'm not proposing that I'm "right" about any of this. I'm describing my psyche, which plainly wants a world that meets my definition of heavenly. I invite you to imagine a world with infinite stimulation and learning opportunities, but no ickiness. Do you agreee with me that that would be a nice place to visit ... and to live?
Inspired by your thoughts and feelings I come to think, that for me it is not possible or desirable to live in permanent equanimity. For me it is rather about acquiring the awareness and means to find some equanimity again after I got stirred up, because I am what I am, a judging being with an infinite amount of trigger points, or at least heaps of these.
Sometimes I see myself and others like this image of a Corona virus, with lots of trigger points, loaded with explosives, sticking out from my core. Some are close with lots of explosives, some are further away with a small load. If something triggers me out there, it goes off and does little damage to the triggering event/person and to myself. If someone close triggers something close to my core, a lot of damage is done.
As a consequence, having experienced lots of triggering, close and far, I am trying to disassemble the explosives or reduce the loads to heal myself and others faster.
Even if I could imagine a world where only good and inspiring things happen, I know and believe that in our human reality it seems not possible.
We are sensorik beings, build and trained to notice all the differences and nuances of everything, to judge it for good or bad and their degrees and then to deal with them.
Striving for equanimity after arousel is one way. To get better and better in it us even better.
It’s an achievement to identify and be able to express your core values. How much more of an achievement would it be to recognize that they are there for you, but not to be projected onto others as criteria for acceptance and friendship. While there may be some values that are so distasteful that you can’t abide being in the presence of their owner, by and large accepting others as they are is a prerequisite to getting along in this world, unless being a hermit is your objective.
I can see value in this comment, it does not trigger me, It does not feel like bullying. Could we accept everybody and everything as it is, we might have equanimity and a boring life. Our identity would have gone, alle values would be core values or nothing.
I did not mean to suggest he was bullying. I didn't have that reaction at all. I was responding to what he seemed to be suggesting, that we should honor all value systems equally even if we choose not to hang out with their owner. ILt was a Socratic inquiry.
His comments (two of them now) smack a bit of judgmentalism, and I don't find that useful. I"m putting my soul out there pretty nakedly, and I'm not doing it to be told why I'm "wrong." For all I know, I'm projecting, which is why I asked him about this flat-out. I value his participation and want to clear out any noise that may be there.
By way of counterpoint: Are you good with bullying? Do you believe all values are created equal?
I will also note that you seem to be imputing stuff to me that isn't actually there. I'm not projecting anything onto anyone. I prefer to hang with like-minded people. I think that makes me human. And I see no reason to change that preference. FWIW, I tend to get along with people fine, including ones I don't see eye-to-eye with. This is deep-dive stuff I'm writing about, not social getting-alongness.
Between this comment and your last one, I get the sense that I've gotten on your wrong side somehow. Is that actually the case? It can be hard to read between the virtual lines.
You appeared to be belittling your friend's world view and then abandoning his friendship because of it, as if he is undesirable, gullible, ignorant or simplistic. My counterpoint is that it may work well for him, comfort him, etc. It sounds like your world view is a tougher one, maybe even a bit grim for you. If that's the case, why continue carrying it? Find something more hopeful, uplifting to hope for. Even "I just don't know" leaves more space for your neighbor to occupy. I'm suggesting values are personal, even if they happen to be shared amongst other people, and it's possible to agree to disagree and still get along. I think finding equanimity is partly about coming to terms with others, coming to peace with your most closely held values and also the fact that your neighbor won't precisely share yours, in fact not even your spouse, your child, your parent. Indeed, it's easier to hang with like-minded people, but taking that to it's logical endpoint is closer to an echo-chamber. Perhaps my comments should be posed as a question; does he deserve to lose your friendship because of his evangelical views?
No, I am not in favor of bullying. I don't think there's any place for it in a civil society, even though it appears to be rampant, to one degree or another. Does it make sense that one can make a judgement without being judgemental? I have a couple of treasured friends with very different world views, from whom I have learned a great deal.
I am actually very interested in your views, because we have the same objective. Equinimity may be the best possible state one can achieve in a very tumultous world. I've been on the hunt ever since I crashed out of a beloved professional career where I found all the validation I would ever need, until the work environment became intolerable, made me ill and disabled me.
Irk to not to irk!
This would be my 10 cents on this.
Irk to train your irk-immune system, your equanimity system.
With all being one, as the saints and you are saying, irking is part of the immune system, the very healthy chain of action and reaction to keep us alive and healthy for long stretches, like being in equanimity at times.
When our immune system aka equanimity is challenged, a inner war is triggered and rages and we get seriously affected or healed.
Should we have serious unbalance in these systems, we might die or at least get seriously harmed.
Without any immune defence, we would have to live in an sterile environment, a irk free environment and this would be little fun and not last very long.
A life in total equanimity for me is like living in a sterile box alone. I do not long and strive for this.
I prefer a fully alert and trained immune system, which needs all kind of stimulatiion/inking.
I do not want to reach that point in life, when eternal equanimity sets in, too early. It is called dying. But this one I would like to embrace with a fully functioning anti irk immune system.
Lovely thoughts. I believe there's a Hindu creation story about how one of their deities created 'otherness' so they wouldn't be bored.
Josef, I'm not proposing that I'm "right" about any of this. I'm describing my psyche, which plainly wants a world that meets my definition of heavenly. I invite you to imagine a world with infinite stimulation and learning opportunities, but no ickiness. Do you agreee with me that that would be a nice place to visit ... and to live?
Inspired by your thoughts and feelings I come to think, that for me it is not possible or desirable to live in permanent equanimity. For me it is rather about acquiring the awareness and means to find some equanimity again after I got stirred up, because I am what I am, a judging being with an infinite amount of trigger points, or at least heaps of these.
Sometimes I see myself and others like this image of a Corona virus, with lots of trigger points, loaded with explosives, sticking out from my core. Some are close with lots of explosives, some are further away with a small load. If something triggers me out there, it goes off and does little damage to the triggering event/person and to myself. If someone close triggers something close to my core, a lot of damage is done.
As a consequence, having experienced lots of triggering, close and far, I am trying to disassemble the explosives or reduce the loads to heal myself and others faster.
Even if I could imagine a world where only good and inspiring things happen, I know and believe that in our human reality it seems not possible.
We are sensorik beings, build and trained to notice all the differences and nuances of everything, to judge it for good or bad and their degrees and then to deal with them.
Striving for equanimity after arousel is one way. To get better and better in it us even better.