Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2013 12:01:08 GMT -5
Has anyone considered "ownership?"
Why do you want to own things?
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 6, 2013 16:30:58 GMT -5
Has anyone considered "ownership?" Why do you want to own things? I think that's a good question. I can't think of a good answer off the top of my head.
|
|
|
Ownership
Aug 6, 2013 17:04:41 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by topology on Aug 6, 2013 17:04:41 GMT -5
Ownership is a product of a frustrated will. When a person tries to employ a tool to carry out their will but the tool is otherwise absent or occupied by another person, frustration occurs. This frustration leads to disputes and conflict over who's "right" it is to use the tool. Think of two children fighting over the same toy because they want to play with it at the same time. Property ownership is a way of settling disputes between whose "right" it is to use the tool. The will of the person labelled as "owner" trumps the will of the non-owner. Honoring/practicing the convention of property ownership is social lubricant. Apart from the practical benefits of honoring the convention, property ownership is a complete fiction, which is why the concept is frought with so many gotchyas. Disputes between wills, disputes between claims of ownership, transferring ownership when a person dies, liability with respect to ownership, etc.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 6, 2013 18:25:38 GMT -5
Ownership starts with the body. Our bodies are separate, we need to own our own food and cloth, otherwise we can't survive.
The problem is not ownership, but rather theft. For example it's not possible for a particular individual to earn billions of dollars unless he cheats his employees and customers out of their money, and that's the same thing as theft. Capitalism is the machine of organised theft. If authorities don't intervene and people never resist, and if the machine is left to its own devices then sooner or later a total monopoly will occur, i.e. all will own nothing and one will own everything.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Aug 6, 2013 18:34:54 GMT -5
Has anyone considered "ownership?" Why do you want to own things? You don't have to ask other people these kinds of questions. Look inside, and find the answers for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 6, 2013 20:02:02 GMT -5
Has anyone considered "ownership?" Why do you want to own things? You don't have to ask other people these kinds of questions. Look inside, and find the answers for yourself. Triangulation There are two kinds of triangulation. One form of triangulation is used to find the location of an object within a scene. This uses the known location of sensors and the relative location of an object to those sensors to determine the location of the object. Example: Using several cell towers to triangulate the location of a specific cell phone. The other form of triangulation is to determine the location of a sensor given its relative location to known locations of objects. Example: using multiple photos of the night sky from a stationary camera to determine the location of the camera on the surface of the earth. This later form of triangulation is actually very applicable to "the spiritual search". Allow me to motivate why, but first let's talk about coffee. How do you know what your favorite flavor of coffee is without tasting a range of coffees? How can you develop a discerning palette that is able to compare and contrast the flavors of different beans, roasts, grinds and brews without trying the range of possible coffees? Once you have the palette, then you can begin tweaking the roast, beans, grind and brew to navigate the terrain of coffee flavors. A new coffee drinker can indicate whether a coffee experience was pleasurable or painful, but they won't be able to say for sure whether it was good/quality coffee. It takes a range of experiences to say that. Now back to triangulation and ZD's recommendation of turning within to find an answer. I'm going to propose that having a good answer to one's questions requires a range of experience and some insightful observations to know the terrain. If one is confused and without experience, going within for a good answer is going to lead to frustration and uncertainty because they really don't know much about the problem they're trying to solve. This is where turning to "experts" can be useful or completely misleading. By looking at an expert's testimony there is triangulation at play. You're trying to get to a point where you can see through the expert's eyes, to see what they see and to see from their perspective on things. Getting into that perspective takes triangulation. When you pull together the testimony of multiple experts and triangulate into each of their perspectives, you can use the different perspectives to do another level of triangulation. This begins to map out the territory and soon you find that you can see things in the territory that experts may have missed. You are developing your own expertise. This is where you can begin to decide what is good from your own perspective. Now apply this to "the spiritual search". You have the testimony of various "experts" on different aspects of the search, Tolle, Mooji, Rose, Harwood, UG K., J.K., Niz, Ramana, and the list goes on. Hundreds of "experts", how can you know who is good and who isn't? How can you know when your own answer is good? Trying to see through the eyes of others and employing triangulation has been an invaluable process for me in both discovering the territory and in deciding what a good answer is. Yes I use in the moment body-confirmation, i.e. intuition, but I didn't get a refined body-sense/intuition by sitting in front of the TV. I read widely and I explored until I got a good sense of the terrain. ZD, you yourself are widely-read and widely-experienced. Could you speak as confidently as you do now about what a good answer is, what a good action is, without having read and explored the range of answers via the perspective of others who claim to be "experts"? Would collecting the perspectives and opinions of those that might be experts be a beneficial process to engage to figure out how to find their own center and where to go to within themselves for answers? I agree ultimately we must go within, but where is within until we know where without is? Where is center until we know where the periphery is? Reading the words of those that are at center might bring about Amit's Resonance and create a Rapport so that one finds themselves looking from center as a result of looking through the eyes of someone who is at center.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 6, 2013 20:09:26 GMT -5
Own is now with the letters all mixed up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2013 20:14:28 GMT -5
who doesn't like a nice giraffe pic?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2013 3:05:58 GMT -5
Ownership starts with the body. Our bodies are separate, we need to own our own food and cloth, otherwise we can't survive. The problem is not ownership, but rather theft. For example it's not possible for a particular individual to earn billions of dollars unless he cheats his employees and customers out of their money, and that's the same thing as theft. Capitalism is the machine of organised theft. If authorities don't intervene and people never resist, and if the machine is left to its own devices then sooner or later a total monopoly will occur, i.e. all will own nothing and one will own everything. ** [ contains conscious repression ] **
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 7, 2013 7:56:40 GMT -5
What is the woman blathering about?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2013 7:57:40 GMT -5
Has anyone considered "ownership?" Why do you want to own things? to have access to what ever, 'cause you want it to be there.
|
|
|
Post by hybrid on Aug 7, 2013 8:42:08 GMT -5
Has anyone considered "ownership?" it's an idea seems like a good idea
|
|
|
Post by serpentqueen on Aug 7, 2013 10:50:53 GMT -5
Has anyone considered "ownership?" Why do you want to own things? It is important to me that I own my uterus and my other bodily parts and get to make my own decisions about what to do or not do with them without government interference.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 7, 2013 13:31:17 GMT -5
What is the woman blathering about? I think she likes you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2013 14:45:50 GMT -5
You don't have to ask other people these kinds of questions. Look inside, and find the answers for yourself. Triangulation There are two kinds of triangulation. One form of triangulation is used to find the location of an object within a scene. This uses the known location of sensors and the relative location of an object to those sensors to determine the location of the object. Example: Using several cell towers to triangulate the location of a specific cell phone. The other form of triangulation is to determine the location of a sensor given its relative location to known locations of objects. Example: using multiple photos of the night sky from a stationary camera to determine the location of the camera on the surface of the earth. This later form of triangulation is actually very applicable to "the spiritual search". Allow me to motivate why, but first let's talk about coffee. How do you know what your favorite flavor of coffee is without tasting a range of coffees? How can you develop a discerning palette that is able to compare and contrast the flavors of different beans, roasts, grinds and brews without trying the range of possible coffees? Once you have the palette, then you can begin tweaking the roast, beans, grind and brew to navigate the terrain of coffee flavors. A new coffee drinker can indicate whether a coffee experience was pleasurable or painful, but they won't be able to say for sure whether it was good/quality coffee. It takes a range of experiences to say that. Now back to triangulation and ZD's recommendation of turning within to find an answer. I'm going to propose that having a good answer to one's questions requires a range of experience and some insightful observations to know the terrain. If one is confused and without experience, going within for a good answer is going to lead to frustration and uncertainty because they really don't know much about the problem they're trying to solve. This is where turning to "experts" can be useful or completely misleading. By looking at an expert's testimony there is triangulation at play. You're trying to get to a point where you can see through the expert's eyes, to see what they see and to see from their perspective on things. Getting into that perspective takes triangulation. When you pull together the testimony of multiple experts and triangulate into each of their perspectives, you can use the different perspectives to do another level of triangulation. This begins to map out the territory and soon you find that you can see things in the territory that experts may have missed. You are developing your own expertise. This is where you can begin to decide what is good from your own perspective. Now apply this to "the spiritual search". You have the testimony of various "experts" on different aspects of the search, Tolle, Mooji, Rose, Harwood, UG K., J.K., Niz, Ramana, and the list goes on. Hundreds of "experts", how can you know who is good and who isn't? How can you know when your own answer is good? Trying to see through the eyes of others and employing triangulation has been an invaluable process for me in both discovering the territory and in deciding what a good answer is. Yes I use in the moment body-confirmation, i.e. intuition, but I didn't get a refined body-sense/intuition by sitting in front of the TV. I read widely and I explored until I got a good sense of the terrain. ZD, you yourself are widely-read and widely-experienced. Could you speak as confidently as you do now about what a good answer is, what a good action is, without having read and explored the range of answers via the perspective of others who claim to be "experts"? Would collecting the perspectives and opinions of those that might be experts be a beneficial process to engage to figure out how to find their own center and where to go to within themselves for answers? I agree ultimately we must go within, but where is within until we know where without is? Where is center until we know where the periphery is? Reading the words of those that are at center might bring about Amit's Resonance and create a Rapport so that one finds themselves looking from center as a result of looking through the eyes of someone who is at center. I've been thinking about this "triangulation" but I like things easy just handed to me. I'm accustomed to things being served right to me. I don't like washing my own dishes either. I want Steve to wash my dishes and my feet like they do in Bolder. It will help him grow.
|
|