Bipolar

Pages

AuthorTopic: Bipolar
Agent
Member # 1934
Profile Homepage #50
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:


Since you are not a woman, have never been a woman, and seem to be pretty much entirely disconnected from how women work, I'd appreciate it if you would stop ignorantly speaking on behalf of what they are experiencing.

Same to you, Synergy.

Being a woman heading into a science field, I tell you that you have no authority describing how we feel about such things. Soulless? Hardly.

--------------------
You acquire an item: Radio Free Foil
Posts: 1169 | Registered: Monday, September 23 2002 07:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #51
Your responses all demonstrate you don't even understand what I have said by what I have said. I stand by what I said, but I will not explain it further.

-S-

--------------------
A4 ItemsA4 SingletonG4 ItemsG4 ForgingG4 Infiltrator N:R Items The Lonely Celt A5 Items A5 Map
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #52
If I were a lesser man, I'd just quote Synergy's last post on the previous page, quote VCH's latest post, and leave it at that. I shall not.

Synergy: Your most recent posts have attempted to stereotype everything, from men and women to science. If you simply tone down the stereotypes, you'll probably be met with less stiff resistance.

Words are as treacherous or reliable as the person using them. Say what you mean, and the words will communicate just fine.

[ Saturday, December 22, 2007 17:07: Message edited by: Kelandon ]

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #53
Comfort yourself with that naive belief, if it serves you, but it fits right into the "stereotypical" picture I was painting quite unconcisely with words, which are mere approximate symbols for realities which are known only by experience and felt sense in the first place.

-S-

--------------------
A4 ItemsA4 SingletonG4 ItemsG4 ForgingG4 Infiltrator N:R Items The Lonely Celt A5 Items A5 Map
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #54
Goodbye forever, Synergy. See you next week.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Agent
Member # 1934
Profile Homepage #55
Synergy, you don't need to explain yourself. We're just soulless, science worshiping freaks who couldn't possibly understand your magnificent sensing abilities. We are unworthy to be in your all-knowing, if slightly overbearing presence.

It's all okay if I just say that was satire/fake stereotyping right? Right?

--------------------
You acquire an item: Radio Free Foil
Posts: 1169 | Registered: Monday, September 23 2002 07:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #56
I do have magnificent abilities...as do you. I have yet to experience mine being either recognized or appreciated here.

-S-

--------------------
A4 ItemsA4 SingletonG4 ItemsG4 ForgingG4 Infiltrator N:R Items The Lonely Celt A5 Items A5 Map
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #57
This probably won't be helpful feedback. But I'm going to try anyway.

Syn, you have commented on several occasions that people have a hard time understanding what you are trying to say. If this is the case on multiple occasions and for many different readers, you might want to consider the possibility that your prose is not taking the most direct route to your intended meaning.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
"Slartucker is going to have a cow when he hears about this," Synergy said.
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Lifecrafter
Member # 6388
Profile #58
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

I do have magnificent abilities...as do you. I have yet to experience mine being either recognized or appreciated here.

-S-

You're very good at purporting to be informed on things you're wildly ignorant about, although those familiar with your peculiarly fetishistic worldview can pretty quickly take you apart.

So far, you've claimed that neurochemical drugs are a sledgehammer compared to the surgical power of counseling; that scientists are soulless automata that lack the imagination necessary to understand the world, that physicians are hidebound and unwilling to accept the value of procedure that, mysteriously, occur routinely at hospitals; and now you're trying to extricate yourself from a particularly impolitic situation: being caught claiming that woman scientists are pretending to be stereotypical men by a woman in the natural sciences.

So there's your magnificent abilities, Synergy: claiming to know what you're talking about, swinging wide at every big slow soft ball thrown your way by way of proof, and then getting petulant - and condescending and offensive - when you get corrected.

When it was just you and me, you were much less worried about being misunderstood. I guess it's a lot easier to pretend to be a free-thinking explorer pressed to the wall by an intellectual fascist when that plays to a comfortable stereotype, eh? But I guess it's your abilities being appreciated that matters.

I'd like you to either admit you've whiffed this one or try and defend your ridiculous position, Synergy. To do otherwise'd be pretty damned disrespectful.

[ Saturday, December 22, 2007 18:33: Message edited by: Najosz Thjsza Kjras ]
Posts: 794 | Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Shaper
Member # 73
Profile #59
quote:
Originally written by VCH:

WOOOOOOOOOOOO!


--------------------
My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art
The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community
The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database
Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database
BoE Webring - Self explanatory
Polaris - Free porn here
Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too)
They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance
--------------------
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #60
I was about to say that ADoS is apparently the lesser man that I am not, but then I clicked on the link. ADoS knows more about being less than I ever will.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Warrior
Member # 12481
Profile #61
I do take exception to the statements about women "trading their souls" for success in a male-dominated world. I have huge respect for women who take on roles that were traditionally male roles, and excel at them. Also, one of my male friends with whom I go to uni is studying to be a physics and math teacher - and he is the most creative, inventive and imaginative person I know. He runs D&D games for us every Monday night, and every session is amazing because he has a gift for creativity and imagination. I don't think you can just go "logic and science = male; creativity and imagination = female"; the world isn't divided up this way.

--------------------
Third generation geek and heathen!
Posts: 93 | Registered: Tuesday, December 11 2007 08:00
Shaper
Member # 247
Profile Homepage #62
quote:
Originally written by Khoth:

quote:
inducting women into the horrors that we once relegated largely to the soulless roles for men
Just because you have some peculiar hatred of science doesn't mean that scientists share your view. Not even female ones.

As for science being a male-biased enterprise, although like too many things it has historically been male-dominated, it may surprise you to hear that women are also capable of rational thought, and the female scientists I know would be insulted at the suggestion that they're "pretending to be men".

Females outnumber males in all of my university science courses. I'm talking 80% to 20% easily.

--------------------
The Knight Between Posts.
Posts: 2395 | Registered: Friday, November 2 2001 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #63
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

words, which are mere approximate symbols for realities which are known only by experience and felt sense in the first place.
They may be, but like it or not, they are what our world consists of. What is your reality if nobody else believes in it?

--------------------
The Noble and Ancient Order of Polaris - We're Not Yet Dead.
EncyclopediaBlades ForgeArchivesStatsRSS (This Topic / Forum) • BlogNaNoWriMo
Did-chat thentagoespyet jumund fori is jus, hat onlime gly nertan ne gethen Firyoubbit 'obio.'
Decorum deserves a whole line of my signature, and an entry in your bookmarks.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #64
Slarty said: "you have commented on several occasions that people have a hard time understanding what you are trying to say. If this is the case on multiple occasions and for many different readers, you might want to consider the possibility that your prose is not taking the most direct route to your intended meaning."

I have considered this. I do think about things like this. Often I know I can word things better. Often I try. Often no matter how much I try, words fail me. My main conclusion is that qualities of my personality type, generation, and interests are all in a minority here, so it is frequently like trying to communicate in a different language to be understood. I do not have this problem in other envrionments in a similar way. If I did, the logical conclusion would be that it is entirely my own disconnect occurring. As Alex pointed out intuitively early on in my appearance here, "you're an NF, aren't you?" I am largely not amongst my kind in an environment full of people whose preoccupations are the hard sciences. This becomes extremely frustrating, irritating, or discouraging at times. Like I said, why am I even bothering? I see virtually no sign of appreciation for what I bring to the table. Even more discouraging, I see very little intrinsic honoring of fellow human beings here. I find myself being less honorable here than I feel represents me or my heart.

I have never felt inclined to defend myself against the dispersions of Alec, because he fails to treat his fellow human being with basic dignity, respect, and honor. I value myself enough to not let someone who demonstrates no respect for another to walk all over me or make demands of me.

I will admit that where I "whiff" it is in how I say things when I am irritated, not in what I am trying to communicate or where my heart is at beneath it. I often say, it is not what you say, it is how you say it. If I had worded a thing more gently, there would probably be little controversy over the statement. For instance, I might have said something more like:

Women have made headway into all sorts of arenas formerly dominated by men. What has changed less is the way the work environment works, and what aspects of human contribution are valued. The intuitive and feeling functions most typically seen and accepted in women are still not seen as particularly viable, acceptable, or useful components of the institutionalized working world.

This is merely one aspect I could mention, not the entirety of the supposition. There are many people and writings out there commenting how women still struggle against male attitudes and biases and ways of doing business in the working world. Progress is also being made, and I am overall optimistic about where we are headed. I can be both very upset with how things are and optimistic about our prospects at the same time. I grow weary seeing how often people seem unable to observe or reconcile that both sentiments can sit easily enough side by side in the same human being. I see a lot of you are "all this" or "all that" responsiveness here. I think we all take issue when we get simplified, negated, stereotyped. I am guilty as well, and for that, please accept my apology.

A bit more on the revised statement: There are exceptions and brave women helping to reform workplace roles, as I plainly stated in the context of my prior assertion. I note all responses failed to acknowledge that, at the very least, I allowed for exceptions. I stand by my original assertion. I acknowledge that the way I communicated it was needlessly provocative. I know my heart and meaning. None of you really does, because you'd have to actually be with another person in person to get any real feeling for who and how they are, but I note a number of you seem to take particular relish in assuming and assigning the worse you can to another. This I find truly repellant, disturbing, and discouraging. It's an "evil eye
" syndrome, a glass half empty, a true disregard for the most magnificent thing there is, another person who can never be, think, or do quite like you, which neither makes her or him superior nor inferior. I find many attitudes here a miserable estimation of one's fellow human being. Frankly, it breaks my heart to witness. And it sometimes I become very angry in response. When I speak at those times, it ain't pretty, and I get into trouble. I continue to work on this quality of my behavior, because I find it both uproductive and undesirable in myself and in anyone. I do apologize for offenses caused by my doing so here. I do not apologize for my underlying heart or beliefs. I find those pure. My delivery frequently fails or just plain sucks. I also seem to have a perverse penchant for choosing a challenging environment. I think this is more for what I will glean from the experience, than what anyone else is likely to get from anything I engage here. But I don't know. These things are mysteries.

I am inclined to rail at times against "scientists," because I have found that a person like myself who operates more in the realm of intuition and feeling, is typically despised or discarded by the spirit of science and those who dwell in it. It has reduced reality to what I do see as a nearly entirely soulless and mechanistic view of the world and the human being. My soul recoils at that view alone, and I do consider it quite to be missing some of the grandest and most pertinent qualities of being. It doesn't make science or scientists wrong or evil to me, but it does make it incomplete, and, at times, conceited in outrightly dismissing that which is outside its grasp, interest, dogma, power of observation, or belief sytsem. Science is a belief system, though it likes to think otherwise. Science does look and feel very much like the, yes, stereotypical male mindset in the world to me. I see it as the natural product of the way the male mind seeks to experience, know, manipulate, and control the world in very concrete terms. It's great stuff. It's valuable. It's wonderful. It's also only part of the grand puzzle and experience of life, and it could be more humble to at least consider the possibility that there is much outside its grasp that is relevant to our existence. I do see science as religion in its attitude. "We are the One Truth, and our Method is the One True Method. There is no other way to the Kingdom, but through us. We will bring you salvation." This I resist. Around this I at times become upset, because I see it negating many wonderful things and people. It denies God. It reduces Love to neurochemistry and hormones. Science is unromantic. I am always inclined to stick up for the underdog. Science is not the underdog in this present day.

And actually, I live in an environment, Seattle, which is bustling with all kinds of cool metaphysical, spiritual, and alternate practices of health and life. This stuff is growing steadily in the country, probably to the dismay of a man like Alec, whom I believe can only see this as a misfortune. I could choose to stop fussing over an aspect of the world I already see being modified and increasingly balanced against, because once again, I am quite hopeful about where everything is headed. When I spend time in an environment that does not exhibit this so much, I can become reactionary again. No one enjoys feeling marginalized. I experience and wrestle within myself with the duality of opposite viewpoints about the world I myself hold.

People are very complex. I see so much simplistic reductionism of others and their viewpoints here, it's pathetic. I'm guilty. I'm admitting it. In my heart, I see no one as simplistic or anything other than wholly wonderful, unique, and yes, magnificent. I continue to seek to align my expression and my heart. I think that is why I have persisted here. It is a good, challenging arena for me in which to exercise and gauge this progress. I still think I've had enough though. I need appreciation sooner or later, or I will simply stop a thing. What's the fun of it? I really don't get off on conflict for its own sake. The only person I recall ever actually stating in any way that they appreciated my being here in the last year is Salmon.

-S-

--------------------
A4 ItemsA4 SingletonG4 ItemsG4 ForgingG4 Infiltrator N:R Items The Lonely Celt A5 Items A5 Map
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Lifecrafter
Member # 4682
Profile #65
I'm bipolar. All I have to say based on my experience is 1. Anti-depressants throw you into a mania and 2. When you are manic you are incredibly annoying and impulsive.

--------------------
Do not underestimate the power of the mechanical pencil.

Join the Dark side. We have cookies.

"Hey, Patrick, feel this random pipe. It's squishy"-Nils
Posts: 834 | Registered: Thursday, July 8 2004 07:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #66
quote:
Originally written by Arancaytar:

quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

words, which are mere approximate symbols for realities which are known only by experience and felt sense in the first place.
They may be, but like it or not, they are what our world consists of. What is your reality if nobody else believes in it?

Do you imagine that anything I have to say or have embraced is exclusive to me or my own imagining? I appreciate the possible consideration that I am that original and inventive, but I assure you it is not the case. As I mentioned recently, the "bizarre" concepts of reality I have inserting into my dialog of late, are largely contained in the "Conversations With God" books of Neale Donald Walsch, which were multi-million bestsellers starting a decade ago. It is estimated that each book of the initial trilogy at least, has been read by ten million people. There is a well-received movie that came out about a year ago of the same title about the life of the author. So provocative and compelling was the material and ideas in these books, that CWG study groups formed spontaneously all over the world to engage the material. It's ongoing. I've formed a group with some fellow enthusiasts here in Seattle. There is also an existing group a few miles from where I live which I have also visited. So, if I were the only one who believed in this crazy stuff, it would be a lonely and loony preoccupation indeed. I will agree fully however that it is indeed a serious mind-trip.

There is nothing new under the sun, and for any idea you hear, there are probably quite a few people who believe it or practice it. It might even be working for them in ways not imaginable by others. You might be amazed how many people believe, are contemplating, testing, or working out of some of the wacky stuff I've been spouting. It's a bigger, richer, more diverse world than any of us in our finiteness is capable of comprehending, or fit to judge. As Shakespeare aptly put into the mouth of Hamlet many years ago, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Thanks for the perhaps inadvertent vote of confidence, but I'm just an assimilator and recompiler of whatever I cross that makes me jump up and down (or feel totally at peace with) inside. Then I seek to see if and how it works.

-S-

--------------------
A4 ItemsA4 SingletonG4 ItemsG4 ForgingG4 Infiltrator N:R Items The Lonely Celt A5 Items A5 Map
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #67
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

...Often no matter how much I try, words fail me. My main conclusion is that qualities of my personality type, generation, and interests are all in a minority here, so it is frequently like trying to communicate in a different language to be understood. I do not have this problem in other environments in a similar way. If I did, the logical conclusion would be that it is entirely my own disconnect occurring. As Alex pointed out intuitively early on in my appearance here, "you're an NF, aren't you?" I am largely not amongst my kind in an environment full of people whose preoccupations are the hard sciences. This becomes extremely frustrating, irritating, or discouraging at times...
Except it isn't just young, concrete-thinking scientists who have trouble understanding what you are trying to say. I have that problem too, and I belong in most of the same demographics as you: abstract thinker, eccentric thinker, emotion preferred to reason, psychotherapy career, nontraditional theism, etc. I'm younger than you, but not dramatically so.

It may well be that you come across more clearly in person: that's true for many people. But don't blame demographics.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
"Slartucker is going to have a cow when he hears about this," Synergy said.
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #68
Well, there's a simple bottom line. Words do not and cannot best express much of what I would communicate, anyway. Words without a body, voice, and eye-contact to convey much of the energy and feeling of what I am communicating are almost ludicrously limited in their ability to do so. It is less of an issue where one is concerned with communicating data/fact rather than high concept or the intuitive, and that which really can only be known experientially. God can never be communicated through words, which is why for all the divine messengers and messages that have come to the world, they have one and all been bastardized and misappropriated once committed to the page. There is no particular remedy to this dilemma, the limitation of words. I don't believe words are, or will be, our highest form of communication at all. I can conceive of a future human society, in which words eventually play a far less central role. I say this as one who dearly loves words and their power. One can only attempt awkwardly within the confines of the tools one has on hand. This awareness sometimes fuels my laments about the limitations of online relationship even to the point of declaring it is not "real" relationship, for which I also caught a deal of flak.

This all harkens to one of the four existential dilemmas we contend with: Isolation and Connection: no matter how much we desire to be known, the reality in this realm is that no one else can truly know you, what it is to be you, what you experience, or just what it is you are even trying to communicate even. No one else can be you. Somehow we all have to come to terms with this, and find this as okay. This is part of an illusion, anyway, because on a higher level, we are all part of the same being, the same energy, the same God, if you will. I have come to terms with the concept of this dilemma in the immediate context of the illusion. I still struggle with the experience of this. I, like anyone, at heart desire to be known as I am, and embraced for that. I think anyone being honest would admit this is a basic desire we all share. We desire to express Who We Are and be acknowledged, accepted, and found desirable and useful for that.

For the kinds of things I do like to talk about, and the way I do like to communicate (which is full of wordplay, irony, paradox, teasing, subtlety, and the seemingly contradictory side by side), I don't know how much better I could make much clear in print alone without derailing and negating all the devices I like to employ. If you have to explain the joke, what's the point of telling it?

When I turned Alorael's statement about my never being a scientist, so not being qualified to comment on scientists, I thought there was a very inherent and inviting irony and parody to be made by using it to show that the very same thinking can equally point out that a person who has never been a woman should therefore be unable to comment on the experience of women. It was more tongue in cheek than serious, but it also makes a point.

I immediately knew that in doing so, it would be used to point out that I also have never been a woman, that the point applies equally to myself. Which it does of course. Anyone with a remote sense of who I am should realize that I am intelligent enough to be quite aware of the tremendous irony employed in utilizing such a simple statement, which can be turned right back around on myself just as equally. I am quite willing to poke just as much fun at my precious self as any other. I don't get that people acknowledge or appreciate that about me. I don't see many people willing to do that, personally.

Predictably, anyone who pointed at that parodied statement only chose to use it to condemn me, but not to observe or validate the essential truth toward everyone else, which is that at one level, none of us is truly fit to speak absolutely for that which we have not experienced. I found the nature of response disappointingly disingenuine, utilized only to attack someone who was irritating them, but not to fairly treat the point.

Meanwhile, despite this existential limitation also just described, we are all qualified to speak on that which we do experience, which in my case is what it feels like to the person one is in the context of any environment one has been in. Moreover, one can corroborate that others are describing a similar experience in that context. Even moreover, if one has developed empathy, one can begin to experience in oneself what others experience. It is not necessary to be the other person in their position to get a feeling for aspects of their experience. Thus, another paradox, and seeming contradiction. Both aspects are true. You cannot be known, yet you can be known. We can't walk in another's shoes and speak for their experience, yet we can. Let's be fair in our use of such leveraging, if we are going to use it. It works in all directions. I acknowledge it on my behalf. Who will acknowledge it on their own behalf?

I find we have much more in common as human beings than not. I don't personally find women difficult to understand or baffling or mysterious. I think the primary reason men do is because they have largely been isolated in gender roles which serve to disconnect them from parts of being which women are permitted to be and express, not because we are inherently that different at heart or capacity. I see so much of what we are and do as contrivance and role-playing, not what we are biologically or genetically predetermined.

-S-

[ Sunday, December 23, 2007 10:52: Message edited by: Synergy ]

--------------------
A4 ItemsA4 SingletonG4 ItemsG4 ForgingG4 Infiltrator N:R Items The Lonely Celt A5 Items A5 Map
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Guardian
Member # 2476
Profile #69
Synergy, you wrote that 'your soul recoils', and I thought: mmh, as I understand 'soul', it wouldn't recoil, couldn't really, so Synergy's concept must be different from mine, but what is it? How does Synergy define 'soul' which is such a very important aspect of life to him? I don't know. He doesn't tell us.

Likewise 'intuition'. How do you define 'intuition', what precisely do you refer to when you say that you want to let yourself be led by it? What is leading you?

The concepts may be very clear to you, in which case understanding would be easier, if you shared them with us.

--------------------
Polaris
Rache's A3 Site reformatted 2/3 done
Rache's A3 Site, original version
Posts: 1828 | Registered: Saturday, January 11 2003 08:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #70
quote:
Originally written by ef:

Synergy, you wrote that 'your soul recoils', and I thought: mmh, as I understand 'soul', it wouldn't recoil, couldn't really, so Synergy's concept must be different from mine, but what is it? How does Synergy define 'soul' which is such a very important aspect of life to him? I don't know. He doesn't tell us.

Likewise 'intuition'. How do you define 'intuition', what precisely do you refer to when you say that you want to let yourself be led by it? What is leading you?

The concepts may be very clear to you, in which case understanding would be easier, if you shared them with us.

Fair enough, ef. You're the first person in some time who has actually asked me to define simple terms like this, rather than assume they understand what I mean by them. My assumption has been that mostly that means that people just don't care and aren't interested, and that's fine too. But, I'm impressed. I've been waiting for someone to do it. It demonstrates a person may care to understand you, rather than judge you and your intent, without further inquiry. I would hope any of us would be happy to try to explain our terms, if someone would only ask. So..thanks for asking. I'm happy to try. I think genuine dialog that honors the other would tend to proceed more along these lines often "What do you mean by that?" "OK, and what do you mean by that?" I'm not sure if I've been modeling that sufficiently myself. I crave dialog on that level though. Curiosity, rather than judgement, and pre-judgement, which is prejudice. It is also how therapists are taught to conduct therapy.

Soul, as I use it, is essentially what in psychology is called the 'superconscious.' It is the part of you which is most in connection with God, as many would put it. It knows everything there is to know, and what you are seeking to experience in this life here. It is bigger than the you you think you know. It actually keeps you on that track regardless of what you consciously think of your experience. It goes far beyond your conscious awareness of things. It is the part of you which communicates truth through your deepest feeling, your gut response, if you are in tune with it. The part of you that can reliably register what your Soul is saying is your tummy. The tummy knows. If you sit with a thing, that gut feeling will tell you what is true for you, what is "right"/appropriate for you, what resonates with you. The soul is the part of Self people commune with in meditation and other practices to find clarity, centering, inspiration, communion with Self, with God, and a sense of connection with all others as well. Intuition is the feeling and communication that comes from your soul, which is always your truth.

The trouble often comes in when we translate our deepest feeling or intuition into emotion by processing it through the thinking of the mind. That is where we assign meaning to things, and we are often incorrect in the meanings we assign. This is not to imply there is anything bad about the mind. It's just the place and filter where we have so much misinformation accumulated. Depending on what meaning you give things, you will have a certain experience and emotion in response. The emotion we experience may or may not accurately reflect the original feeling communicated by the soul. But the initial signal, message, communication from that deepest part of you is never confused, and it is always your truth. It is impossible for your soul itself to ever mislead you. Learning to get in touch with your deepest feeling on things, and not confusing that with your outplaying emotions is key to being led by what is true.

I am not claiming I have anything close to perfect awareness of my true feeling and intuition. But as I look back over my life, I have recognized in retrospect how much more than I realized, that it has led me where I needed to go, and was communicating truth to me long before I had a conscious reason to accept its message or understand why it was true. I had the feeling and sense of many things before an understanding of them. Ultimately, to be led by the Soul is to be led by God in you, God as you, but God is such a loaded word and concept, I hesitate to use it too often. So many assumptions rush in as to what "God" means. There's another word that begs definition anytime anyone uses it. As if God could ever be defined anyway.

And to put it in context, I understand a human being to be a triune being, as are all sublime things in the spiritual/absolute realm: body, mind, and soul. Soul = spirit in many people's lingo, same thing. In some views of God, we have Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Time, which is also sublime consists of past, present, and future. Space consists of here, there, and the space between. In the material universe, we experience things as dualities however, and polarities. Hot/cold, good/evil, up/down, left/right, tall/short...manic/depressed.

One could say that Bipolar Disorder is a pefect demonstration of this as well, at an extreme.

Feel free to make further inquiry, if desired or required.

Thanks for playing.

Oh, and P.S., I also want to ask you your thought about what the soul is.

-S-

[ Sunday, December 23, 2007 11:38: Message edited by: Synergy ]

--------------------
A4 ItemsA4 SingletonG4 ItemsG4 ForgingG4 Infiltrator N:R Items The Lonely Celt A5 Items A5 Map
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #71
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

I am largely not amongst my kind in an environment full of people whose preoccupations are the hard sciences.
As I tried to point out earlier, many of us are not that way. I do study some astronomy, but the reality is that I'm a Classics major who occasionally dabbles in physics. Many of the rest of us are the same way, conversant with basic science but not really scientists.

quote:
And it sometimes I become very angry in response. When I speak at those times, it ain't pretty, and I get into trouble.
I recall a little bit from the equivalent of our CoC over at the Ambrosia Software boards that suggested that one should never post while angry. Walk away from the computer. Wait a few hours. Sleep on it and come back tomorrow. I have found this (when I have the self-control to apply it) to be extremely good advice.

quote:
I am inclined to rail at times against "scientists," because I have found that a person like myself who operates more in the realm of intuition and feeling, is typically despised or discarded by the spirit of science and those who dwell in it.
Even the soft sciences (such as psychology) have embraced the notions of evidence and plausibility.

quote:
Science does look and feel very much like the, yes, stereotypical male mindset in the world to me. I see it as the natural product of the way the male mind seeks to experience, know, manipulate, and control the world in very concrete terms.
I brought up Haraway earlier because you're not the only person who has said something like this. As long as you say that it's the stereotype of a male perspective and not the actual perspective of males, then you're in safer territory.

quote:
It's wonderful. It's also only part of the grand puzzle and experience of life, and it could be more humble to at least consider the possibility that there is much outside its grasp that is relevant to our existence.
This is what I've been trying to point out for a long time. In saying this, you're not making waves. You're not original. You're old news. Really, really old news. People know that science can only answer some of the questions about the universe. But for the questions that it can answer, there's nothing better. And see above about the soft sciences.

quote:
Around this I at times become upset, because I see it negating many wonderful things and people. It denies God. It reduces Love to neurochemistry and hormones. Science is unromantic.
No, no, no, for the love of all that it right and good in this world, NO!!

Science does not deny God. Science has no interest in God, because that's outside the realm of science. Some people claim otherwise. They are wrong.

See SoT's post about "just" neurochemistry. Neurochemistry is an incredibly complicated field, and the chemistry of love is elaborate beyond current reckoning. But (and this is key to understanding why science adds to, not subtracts from, the beauty of a phenomenon) it's in the interplay between the physical causes and the effects that the awesome power and mystery of science can be found.

Put another way: Maxwell's Equations (together with the Lorentz Force Law and some properties of matter) contain basically all of the information of classical electromagnetism. They contain a certain beauty in themselves, in their simplicity and symmetry. But we study Maxwell's Equations not for their own sake, but for the sake of understanding the stuff in the world, like a rainbow. To a scientist, a rainbow is pretty, but looking at a rainbow and then deriving it from first principles is amazing. You can appreciate with intuition and feeling, but appreciating with understanding may be the highest form of appreciation.

When I learned what Rayleigh scattering is, I ran outside and watched the sun setting, because it was beautiful before, but it was many times more beautiful now that I could describe how the colors got to be the way that they are.

I knew a Jewish scientist who uttered a Hebrew prayer in praise of God every time she found out something new and incredible about how the world works.

Science is not unromantic. Science is deeply romantic. Science is profoundly emotional.

quote:
For the kinds of things I do like to talk about, and the way I do like to communicate (which is full of wordplay, irony, paradox, teasing, subtlety, and the seemingly contradictory side by side), I don't know how much better I could make much clear in print alone without derailing and negating all the devices I like to employ.
But people do write with considerably more of those devices than you do and still they are understood. It's not the fault of the devices.

quote:
Anyone with a remote sense of who I am should realize
But you keep saying that we don't really know you. That you can't really communicate. Don't assume that we'll figure out what you're trying to say. Tell us. You're having trouble being understood because you're hoping that we'll follow the same long train of thought that you did as you were writing, but we consistently don't.

This is what I meant by, "Say what you mean." And hell, use a graemlin or two if you need to convey tone. That's what they're there for.

quote:
I don't personally find women difficult to understand or baffling or mysterious. I think the primary reason men do is because they have largely been isolated in gender roles which serve to disconnect them from parts of being which women are permitted to be and express,
This is what I mean when I say that you should lay off the stereotypes.

quote:
Originally written by Pompopsych:

don't blame demographics.
Because when you do, you're stereotyping again.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #72
Alternately, just read some Einstein.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
"Slartucker is going to have a cow when he hears about this," Synergy said.
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #73
Good call. :)

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Guardian
Member # 2476
Profile #74
Thank you for sharing.

My own definition is not set in stone and may change with time and deeper understanding.

As there is a subconscious part of me, so there's a superconscious too. The subconscious seems to be mostly a tapestry of memories, emotional and mental, a storage room of things already past, but influencing my behaviour, my expectations, my outlook on things in my presence.

The superconscious seems always so many steps ahead of me, a tapestry or kind of matrix of my full potentials and possibilities, aware on conscious and subconscious levels, drawing me forward, clear of purpose when my conscious 'I' still struggles in the dark. What I call 'intuition' is that light bulb second of immediate recognition, of sudden understanding, when the superconscious part connects with my conscious awareness and changes it. It may also in that blinding second of clarity change some of the impact that subconscious memories had on me.

That is as close as I can come to an understanding of 'soul'.

--------------------
Polaris
Rache's A3 Site reformatted 2/3 done
Rache's A3 Site, original version
Posts: 1828 | Registered: Saturday, January 11 2003 08:00

Pages