Great! But now earth has been elevated to the same status as a corporation. Corporation = Human = Earth. Whereas it should be Earth->Human->Corporation. In order of causal significance.
@bearfoot>> Have you ever seen ABC's What Would You Do?
The reason why is because we have a habit of asking ourselves "What's in it for me?" which provides the basis for fear. If I help this person I might feel uncomfortable. If I help this person I may look foolish. Others are not helping this person, why should I. I... I... I... I... I... ME MINE. It is so rapidly unconscious that you are simply struck with fear at the thought of helping another and do not consciously cognize the obsession with yourself.
The samaritan never thought about I, he thought about you. That is extremely important. These people stood by laughing and filming because there was something in it for them. Mainly amusement. It is the selfish consumption of their own neurochemicals by a mechanism in their brain which they are feeding off the samaritan as a trigger. They are like crack-heads with their humor to the expense of the one from which they derive their jollies. When they could actually be helping.
It is important to realize that simply finding humor in something can be a form of egotistical consumption of that thing, especially if done with an air of disapproval. Sure, all great wisemen laugh at themselves and the idiocy of mankind, but that's different, that's a Buddha-laugh. Laughing at someone else's misfortune, like Schadenfreude, is egomaniacal.
Cool man, one of my childhood friends died from diabetic complications arising from an addiction to 7-11 slurpies. His name was Josh and died at around age 18.
The technique is called "Panography". According to Wikipedia it differs from "image stitching" in that "the overlaps between adjacent pictures are not removed."
"Panography is thus a type of photomontage and is a sub-set of collage."
"And so the first question that the priest asked, and the first question that the Levite asked was, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?"[7]
But then the Good Samaritan came by, and he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?""
- Martin Luther King Jr, I've Been To The Mountaintop
The priest and levite walked by and saw the Samaritan stuck in the sun-roof, and they again thought "What's in it for me?"
Good deeds, truly good deeds are almost always punished by the priests and levites.
Water-Boarding, Retributive Justice, Polygraph tests, fingerprints, DNA Evidence and Speed Radars; all inventions humanity has put far too much faith in, in order to condemn each other. But wait, that's not all, here are a few more; Sin, Crime and Free-Will.
He's just imitating humanity. The human being is like a cat who is unaware that it's hind-quarters belong to it and instead sets about attacking themselves.
The shadow, which is in conflict with the acknowledged values, cannot be accepted as a negative part of one's own psyche and is therefore projected--that is, it is transferred to the outside world and experienced as an outside object. It is combated, punished, and exterminated as 'the alien out there' instead of being dealt with as one's own inner problem —Erich Neumann (psychologist), Depth Psychology and a New Ethic
It also balances out the yeast. Otherwise you'd get oral candidas (thrush).
BTW, don't give your baby "Gentian Violet". Don't be a dman fool, the stuff is made of coal tar and is toxic. Use Nystatin as prescribed by your pediatrician.
Now, I also mentioned to you scientists and academic philosophers who are working on this same kind of theory. If you want to learn more about that approach, check-out Thomas Metzinger's The Ego Tunnel. Then, if you feel like getting into it deeper, pick up Metzinger's "Being No One". Being No One is a thorough functional analysis of conscious experience which takes a lot to wrap your head around. One said "The book wouldn't have been so short if it wasn't so long." It is meant for hardcore philosophy, Teh Ego Tunnel is more for layfolk.
Metzinger:
No such thing as "I" or "self" exists in the world: nobody ever had or was a "I".
All that exists are phenomenal "I"s, as they appear in conscious experience.
The phenomenal "I", however, is not a thing but an ongoing process; it is the content of a "transparent self-model."
We are systems of ongoing process, we are not individuals, we only maintain a model of individuality. For some reason, these system fail to notice that their model of individuality is just a model, they mistake the model for the real.
This error is part of a broader misconception we have of mixing the representations of reality we have in our mind with reality itself. We regard the mental representation of an object as if it were the object itself.
The reason for this error is that the systems that map and represent for us the world and ourselves are "transparent" as the philosopher George Edward Moore used to call it. We do not see the mental processes that construct for us the representation of reality but see through them. This is the reason why whatever is represented to us is not grasped by us as a representation but as the reality itself.
Okay, Jessss, this is a very elusive concept that I'm trying to share with you. In spiritual traditions it is claimed that people can spend a life-time in spiritual practices without ever becoming enlightened, so-to-speak, which just means they never understand what needs to be understood.
I want to stress that what I'm talking about here precludes all else. What I'm talking about maintains regardless of anything else, it is a requisite for the appearance or apparent existence of anything else.
What I'm talking about is essentially the formation of conscious experience - which necessarily comes before all scientific inquiry and all philosophical prose. It is the bedrock of all existence. There is an old Sufi saying; You can't hold running water in a bucket. The minute you put it in your bucket it stops running. Existence is the same way, if you try to encapsulate it in any system of thought or method of inquiry, you are going to come up short.
Instead what we need to do is reverse engineer existence. We need to begin with what is most incontrovertible and spiral out. All of this work has been done before us, and we merely need to follow the path laid by the great philosophers and prophets. But, we cannot get there quickly or easily, we need to understand beyond all doubt - everything.
We can talk about all kinds of things, but eventually we must realize that all "things" share a common criteria. A thing is demarcated, bounded, finite, limited. Any thing, whatever it is, even if it is just a passing thought, is bounded by what it is not. That which is not bounded, is not limited and extends for eternity. Such a thing does not exist, because if it did, there wouldn't be any-thing else in existence.
With that said, because all things are relative to what they are not, they are all causally bound to each other, thus the entirety of existence is boundless and interdependent. Existence therefor is not a thing, but all things are existent. Existence is a bottomless, limitless everything that cannot be encapsulated in any finite form. Thus, it is often said that existence has no name, or any name for it is misleading and inadequate.
The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao - The Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu
God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ - The Holy Bible, Exodus 3:14
“As air existing in space goes everywhere and is unlimited, so are all things in me.... I am the Vedic rite, I am the sacrifice, I am food, I am sacred formula, I am immortality, I am also death; also the latent cause and the manifest effect.” - The Baghavad Gita, Chapter XI
Human beings are things, finite in nature, and interdependent on the surrounding environment. Read God. The surrounding environment which we call "nature" in contemporary culture is the I AM THAT I AM, the infinite, immortal God. We do not see it that way because we are finite beings, we have to employ our reason and not our discriminating sensory apparti to discern this.
As we come to be as individual entities we also perceive the world as consisting of individual entities, not perceiving the continuity inherent in them. This separation of mind is said to cause us fear and desire. Now, there is a 'you' to protect, to be embarassed, to feel love and greed, to be envious and spiteful. And all of those emotions can be understood, best, within the context of egotistical individuation.
The desire to be loved is the desire to bring concretion to the self (ego). It is the to give fuel to the delusional notion that you exist independently. Free-Will is another such illusion of independence. Our whole lives are driven by the illusion of our own independence. We define and redefine ourselves in order to stand-out as definite things, as really existing independent things. If everyone is jumping off a bridge, I might not just to be different. This is why counterculture springs up in every generation. It's not "Innovation" it's egotism. We desperately want the approval of others, we want to fit into the herd. It's a strange antagonism, we want to be seen differently, whether feared or revered, but we also want to fit in somewhere, even if it's the villain. Otherwise we do not have an identity, nothing to identify with, no belonging to the tapestry of finite being.
All of this could be described by evolutionary theory and similar results would obtain. The main difference is that evolution sees things in terms of gene propogation which is a flacid tool for explaning a lot of human behavior. It can only explain selflessness, altruism with regards to alpha-male behaviors. But I know, for myself, the possibility of a completely selfless act. The trick is, I'm the only person who knows about it, nobody else knows about it except me, there is no praise or blame coming my way because nobody else even knows.
Take some money, a large sum, and donate it in someone else's name, and then, don't tell anybody. Resist the urge to make your good deed known, and feel the pain of having to give-up something without getting even praise in return. You'll begin to realize that doing things for the sake of others is not what humans are generally about. If we don't get a pat-on-the-back a hoo-rah, way to go buddy. We just don't do anything.
Love, in whatever form, high-school sweethearts, bed-buddies, life-long romantic partners, doesn't matter, it's all the same bag of tricks. In the final analysis nobody would ever get involved with anyone else if not for recognition of our own selves and our uniqueness. If I was not unique, then why would you love 'me' and not someone else? If we were all the same, love for some-one would be senseless. We want to be loved for who we are, just like everything else we do, it comes back to our selves and our relative and transient existence. We cling to life this way.
If a person loves only one other person and is indifferent to all others, his love is not love but a symbiotic attachment, or an enlarged egotism. Erich Fromm
Egotism is the source and summary of all faults and miseries. Thomas Carlyle
If some really acute observer made as much of egotism as Freud has made of sex, people would forget a good deal about sex and find the explanation for everything in egotism. Wallace Stevens
Stamping Phone from the National Cash Register Company.
"NCR Stamping Phone
Distributed throughout the store in the various departments, stamping phones are used in the selling departments by the clerks or wrappers in getting a printed authorization on the sales-slip and a perforated authorization in the address labels. The phones should be placed near the wrapping desks so that the clerks can conveniently reach and answer the phones while wrapping the purchased aricles. The stamping phones are equipped with a one-line printing device and a perforating die.
Phones were configured with from 1 to 10 intercom pushbuttons to ring the appropriate credit specialist in the back room. Each button was coded for the range of customer last names handled by each credit authorizer. Pushing the button buzzed the authorizer, who looked up the customer's credit limit on paper files and, if appropriate, authorized the credit sale."
I thought it was supposed to be if the ring-finger is as long as, or longer, than the index finger. And that was supposed to be an indication of how genetically endowed a man was. Further evidence that neither sex cares what the other thinks or has to say, but basis their attractivity on trivialities.
In another study they found, when tracking eye-movements, that women spend more time looking at genitals than men do:
"Men spent more time, and had a higher probability of, looking at female faces. NC Women had more first looks towards, spent more time, and had a higher probability of, looking at genitals. OC Women spent more time, and had a higher probability of, looking at contextual regions of pictures, those featuring clothing or background." - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17362952
The reason why is because we have a habit of asking ourselves "What's in it for me?" which provides the basis for fear. If I help this person I might feel uncomfortable. If I help this person I may look foolish. Others are not helping this person, why should I. I... I... I... I... I... ME MINE. It is so rapidly unconscious that you are simply struck with fear at the thought of helping another and do not consciously cognize the obsession with yourself.
The samaritan never thought about I, he thought about you. That is extremely important. These people stood by laughing and filming because there was something in it for them. Mainly amusement. It is the selfish consumption of their own neurochemicals by a mechanism in their brain which they are feeding off the samaritan as a trigger. They are like crack-heads with their humor to the expense of the one from which they derive their jollies. When they could actually be helping.
It is important to realize that simply finding humor in something can be a form of egotistical consumption of that thing, especially if done with an air of disapproval. Sure, all great wisemen laugh at themselves and the idiocy of mankind, but that's different, that's a Buddha-laugh. Laughing at someone else's misfortune, like Schadenfreude, is egomaniacal.
"Panography is thus a type of photomontage and is a sub-set of collage."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panography
"And so the first question that the priest asked, and the first question that the Levite asked was, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?"[7]
But then the Good Samaritan came by, and he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?""
- Martin Luther King Jr, I've Been To The Mountaintop
The priest and levite walked by and saw the Samaritan stuck in the sun-roof, and they again thought "What's in it for me?"
Good deeds, truly good deeds are almost always punished by the priests and levites.
The shadow, which is in conflict with the acknowledged values, cannot be accepted as a negative part of one's own psyche and is therefore projected--that is, it is transferred to the outside world and experienced as an outside object. It is combated, punished, and exterminated as 'the alien out there' instead of being dealt with as one's own inner problem
—Erich Neumann (psychologist), Depth Psychology and a New Ethic
BTW, don't give your baby "Gentian Violet". Don't be a dman fool, the stuff is made of coal tar and is toxic. Use Nystatin as prescribed by your pediatrician.
Metzinger:
No such thing as "I" or "self" exists in the world: nobody ever had or was a "I".
All that exists are phenomenal "I"s, as they appear in conscious experience.
The phenomenal "I", however, is not a thing but an ongoing process; it is the content of a "transparent self-model."
We are systems of ongoing process, we are not individuals, we only maintain a model of individuality. For some reason, these system fail to notice that their model of individuality is just a model, they mistake the model for the real.
This error is part of a broader misconception we have of mixing the representations of reality we have in our mind with reality itself. We regard the mental representation of an object as if it were the object itself.
The reason for this error is that the systems that map and represent for us the world and ourselves are "transparent" as the philosopher George Edward Moore used to call it. We do not see the mental processes that construct for us the representation of reality but see through them. This is the reason why whatever is represented to us is not grasped by us as a representation but as the reality itself.
I want to stress that what I'm talking about here precludes all else. What I'm talking about maintains regardless of anything else, it is a requisite for the appearance or apparent existence of anything else.
What I'm talking about is essentially the formation of conscious experience - which necessarily comes before all scientific inquiry and all philosophical prose. It is the bedrock of all existence. There is an old Sufi saying; You can't hold running water in a bucket. The minute you put it in your bucket it stops running. Existence is the same way, if you try to encapsulate it in any system of thought or method of inquiry, you are going to come up short.
Instead what we need to do is reverse engineer existence. We need to begin with what is most incontrovertible and spiral out. All of this work has been done before us, and we merely need to follow the path laid by the great philosophers and prophets. But, we cannot get there quickly or easily, we need to understand beyond all doubt - everything.
We can talk about all kinds of things, but eventually we must realize that all "things" share a common criteria. A thing is demarcated, bounded, finite, limited. Any thing, whatever it is, even if it is just a passing thought, is bounded by what it is not. That which is not bounded, is not limited and extends for eternity. Such a thing does not exist, because if it did, there wouldn't be any-thing else in existence.
With that said, because all things are relative to what they are not, they are all causally bound to each other, thus the entirety of existence is boundless and interdependent. Existence therefor is not a thing, but all things are existent. Existence is a bottomless, limitless everything that cannot be encapsulated in any finite form. Thus, it is often said that existence has no name, or any name for it is misleading and inadequate.
The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao - The Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu
God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ - The Holy Bible, Exodus 3:14
“As air existing in space goes everywhere and is unlimited, so are all things in me.... I am the Vedic rite, I am the sacrifice, I am food, I am sacred formula, I am immortality, I am also death; also the latent cause and the manifest effect.” - The Baghavad Gita, Chapter XI
Human beings are things, finite in nature, and interdependent on the surrounding environment. Read God. The surrounding environment which we call "nature" in contemporary culture is the I AM THAT I AM, the infinite, immortal God. We do not see it that way because we are finite beings, we have to employ our reason and not our discriminating sensory apparti to discern this.
As we come to be as individual entities we also perceive the world as consisting of individual entities, not perceiving the continuity inherent in them. This separation of mind is said to cause us fear and desire. Now, there is a 'you' to protect, to be embarassed, to feel love and greed, to be envious and spiteful. And all of those emotions can be understood, best, within the context of egotistical individuation.
The desire to be loved is the desire to bring concretion to the self (ego). It is the to give fuel to the delusional notion that you exist independently. Free-Will is another such illusion of independence. Our whole lives are driven by the illusion of our own independence. We define and redefine ourselves in order to stand-out as definite things, as really existing independent things. If everyone is jumping off a bridge, I might not just to be different. This is why counterculture springs up in every generation. It's not "Innovation" it's egotism. We desperately want the approval of others, we want to fit into the herd. It's a strange antagonism, we want to be seen differently, whether feared or revered, but we also want to fit in somewhere, even if it's the villain. Otherwise we do not have an identity, nothing to identify with, no belonging to the tapestry of finite being.
All of this could be described by evolutionary theory and similar results would obtain. The main difference is that evolution sees things in terms of gene propogation which is a flacid tool for explaning a lot of human behavior. It can only explain selflessness, altruism with regards to alpha-male behaviors. But I know, for myself, the possibility of a completely selfless act. The trick is, I'm the only person who knows about it, nobody else knows about it except me, there is no praise or blame coming my way because nobody else even knows.
Take some money, a large sum, and donate it in someone else's name, and then, don't tell anybody. Resist the urge to make your good deed known, and feel the pain of having to give-up something without getting even praise in return. You'll begin to realize that doing things for the sake of others is not what humans are generally about. If we don't get a pat-on-the-back a hoo-rah, way to go buddy. We just don't do anything.
Love, in whatever form, high-school sweethearts, bed-buddies, life-long romantic partners, doesn't matter, it's all the same bag of tricks. In the final analysis nobody would ever get involved with anyone else if not for recognition of our own selves and our uniqueness. If I was not unique, then why would you love 'me' and not someone else? If we were all the same, love for some-one would be senseless. We want to be loved for who we are, just like everything else we do, it comes back to our selves and our relative and transient existence. We cling to life this way.
Erich Fromm
Egotism is the source and summary of all faults and miseries.
Thomas Carlyle
If some really acute observer made as much of egotism as Freud has made of sex, people would forget a good deal about sex and find the explanation for everything in egotism.
Wallace Stevens
"NCR Stamping Phone
Distributed throughout the store in the various departments, stamping phones are used in the selling departments by the clerks or wrappers in getting a printed authorization on the sales-slip and a perforated authorization in the address labels. The phones should be placed near the wrapping desks so that the clerks can conveniently reach and answer the phones while wrapping the purchased aricles. The stamping phones are equipped with a one-line printing device and a perforating die.
Phones were configured with from 1 to 10 intercom pushbuttons to ring the appropriate credit specialist in the back room. Each button was coded for the range of customer last names handled by each credit authorizer. Pushing the button buzzed the authorizer, who looked up the customer's credit limit on paper files and, if appropriate, authorized the credit sale."
http://www.paul-f.com/NCRcredit.html
I'm not a Schizophrenic, Neither am I L
In another study they found, when tracking eye-movements, that women spend more time looking at genitals than men do:
"Men spent more time, and had a higher probability of, looking at female faces. NC Women had more first looks towards, spent more time, and had a higher probability of, looking at genitals. OC Women spent more time, and had a higher probability of, looking at contextual regions of pictures, those featuring clothing or background." - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17362952