From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Tue Aug 07 2001 - 09:01:04 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote:
> J. R. Molloy writes
>
>
>>[Lee wrote]
>>
>>>...
> ...
>>>>Who is it that seeks this control if not the old brain?
>>>>
>>>Yes, it is the old mind---that is, our present minds---which
>>>seek this control.
>>>
>>Perhaps the word "mind" obscures the issue, because this word can be
>>interpreted in more than one way. So I say parts of the brain seek
>>control, and as the brain comes to recognize and acknowledge the
>>unity of reality, it understands that control is an illusion.
>>
>
> It is *no* illusion. Our brains are already in great control of our
> lives, and this control must be increased. Already we (admirably)
> try to control more and more of our physical environment (just think
> how comfortable your present surroundings are at this very moment).
> Now *this* control will be ultimately unnecessary; ...
> Our minds must also strive to achieve ever greater control over their
> disparate parts. ...
> the people closest to him. I wish to have greater control over my own
> tendency to over-react. I wish to have greater control over my moods
> (when I want to work and when I want to play). And the list goes on
> and on. Which is one reason that the future beckons so brightly.
>
> Lee
To me this seems ill formed. If you were to say you wished greater
integrity (wholeness), then that would be desireable, but consider the
possibility that the the conscious desire to "achieve ever greater
control" would be perceived as an adversarial stance by the parts of the
mind that had been excluded from that coalition. Certainly, were I a
part of your mind, and not a part of your consciousness, I would tend to
see you as standing in an adversarial role with respect to me. I have
trouble trying to model it in any other way. Openness, wholeness,
receptivity ... self-honesty (I don't promise myself that I will attempt
to be honest to anyone else, but that I will always attempt to be honest
with myself. And I say attempt, in the knowledge that I will
occasionally fail, even with myself.)
To me it seems that the first quest should be to understand oneself. If
you understand, then perhaps there can be an agreement as to what is
desireable. (Note: much of the mind is non-verbal, so don't read this
too literally.)
Much of the "New Age" movement was about techniques. Most of the
theories were ... insufficient. Well, the techniques were insufficient,
too, but lots better than nothing. You might look into Neuro-Linguistic
Programming. Bandler and Grinder had a long series of books out
detailing many useful techniques for contacting the mind in a
non-adversarial way. Not sufficient, but certainly better than fighting
with yourself.
--
Charles Hixson
Copy software legally, the GNU way!
Use GNU software, and legally make and share copies of software.
See http://www.gnu.org
http://www.redhat.com
http://www.linux-mandrake.com
http://www.calderasystems.com/
http://www.linuxapps.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:09:33 MST