Are you negative or positive about our existence?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

mister kitten
 
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2009 12:12 pm
@glasstrees,
A feeling of superiority is what expected you to have. I used to be negetive about alot of things. That was a couple of months ago. I was 'emo' or whatever you'd like to call it, I call it stupid. When I compare feelings of happiness to sadness I find that being happy is just so wonderful.
 
G-Thomson
 
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2009 12:36 pm
@mister kitten,
Well, I'm positive about being negative.
Haha.
 
jeeprs
 
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2009 05:20 pm
@glasstrees,
manored;84947 wrote:
On myself =)if god offers us a choice, why it forces us to chose good by menacing us with eternal punishment? It would be better off figuring who is good and who is bad by saying nothing. Also, if god is omniscient, as catholicism claims, why it even bothers to make the test if it knows the result? It could skip straigh to the rewards and punishments part. Finally, if our motivation to be good is heaven and the avoidance of hell, doesnt that means we are doing good out of self-interest, and not trully because we care for others?


That depends on your philosophy of religion. I don't believe that God 'menaces' anybody although it would seem that way from the Old Testament. And I really don't think it is about reward-and-punishment. I understand why it seems that way but it is very basic thinking, if you excuse me for so say. Good=heaven, bad=hell, it is all worked out in advance, go directly to jail. Some might believe that but I really don't think it is what it means.

I am not going to go further with it because I really don't want to be a Catholic apologist. I am not a Catholic, I was just using their doctrine to illustrate a point, but it should be understood for what it is.
 
manored
 
Reply Sun 23 Aug, 2009 11:55 am
@jeeprs,
jeeprs;85029 wrote:
That depends on your philosophy of religion. I don't believe that God 'menaces' anybody although it would seem that way from the Old Testament. And I really don't think it is about reward-and-punishment. I understand why it seems that way but it is very basic thinking, if you excuse me for so say. Good=heaven, bad=hell, it is all worked out in advance, go directly to jail. Some might believe that but I really don't think it is what it means.
I think that is what it means.

No point discussing this though, and it would also be off-topic =)
 
PoeticVisionary
 
Reply Sun 23 Aug, 2009 12:31 pm
@glasstrees,
Once upon a time I was negative and cynical about anything and everything, I swore I didn't want to live to 25 years old and I did everything in my power(short of actual suicide) to make this happen. Well I woke up on my 26th b-day and said what the f**K now do I do. Long story short, I got my $hit together and even though this is my second marriage I am very positive about life. I've got 6 reasons to be happy 5 boys and 1 girl(Daddy's Princess). All this positivity with no religious dogma. I still have ups and downs and always will but overall I'm a positive person now.
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Sun 23 Aug, 2009 05:44 pm
@glasstrees,
dwixi;72997 wrote:
I think this is a very important question.

Lots of people are negative about life not having any inerrant purpose. But I think it would suck if it did. Imagine if you existed and started out with a book of rules written by god telling us that we are here too... erm... create a soul for ourselves? And we keep living lives untill we get to the point of being a all loving perfect soul.... Something like that.
Im much happier with the idea that we can create (recognize our) purpose ourselves. It gives us alot more freedom.

Lots of people are also negative about the fact we are going to die anyway so whats the point? Thats an ego perspective. Its just your ego's natural reaction. People that think that arent looking hard enough. Life is a series of moments that are consciousness experiences. Some of these moments put in order give us the illusion that they are going in the direction of them coming to a stop (end). Time and memories create this delusional state. I think its very interesting our consciousness can experience things like being separate from other parts of it and how we would react with the illusion that it is going to stop one day.

This is my positive take on the main things that give people depression about existence. However I do often feel depressed and negative. But I use this as a sign i need to grow in that area. There are still fears and things i havnt faced at the back of my mind that I need to face so i can atleaset rationalise (understand) it.

My question to you is. Are you negative or positive about this figment we call existence?


I'm not negative. But I realize there is no meaning with it all except getting stuff.
I sometimes think how it would be if I for example had to share my body with someone or had not full control over it. And that makes me quite happy about being an individual despite all the hardships of providing for myself that follow with it.
 
Climacus
 
Reply Sun 23 Aug, 2009 06:28 pm
@G-Thomson,
I am generally a postive person, I do agree that can leave a person vulnerable to pain. What does make me feel negative is the absurdity of society. It is hard watching people go through the motions of their lives not fulling understanding or wanting to understand their own existence. They are numb, trying to fill the mold that society deems necessary. That is why my existence is just that it is mine. I have control over it, I make decision and except whatever consequence becomes of. I learn from those consequences be it good or bad. The key is to be aware of what is going on, always being observant to your surroundings and adjusting as necessary. There have been many authors that have discussed the fact that humans may be the only animal that understands there is an end and that some how makes us more romantic. I believe it is important that we remember we are animals and that can help explain the motivations behind many human actions.
 
Psycobabble
 
Reply Mon 24 Aug, 2009 04:54 am
@Climacus,
Climacus;85216 wrote:
It is hard watching people go through the motions of their lives not fulling understanding or wanting to understand their own existence.


Some people do not have the capacity for self actualization, the role engendered by their society and their enviroment fills their ego with more than enough to satiate their thoughts on the meaning of life and their place in it.

Quote:
humans may be the only animal that understands there is an end and that some how makes us more romantic.


I would agree that humans are the only animals to have an understanding that life has no tenure. To those who ponder it is a burdon, to fools it is a surprise. The result is the same but one lives with their death through out life by the cognoscence of it, and the other lives for the minute without thought of it. A psychological protection mechanism perhaps, or just being as thick as two planks, they are generally the optimists.
 
William
 
Reply Tue 25 Aug, 2009 07:19 am
@glasstrees,
If I might offer some food for thought we can all chew on. As we discuss positive/negative; isn't that the same thing as light/dark? Perhaps that is where we get the term enlightenment from, as that light that comes from within that can be expressed in what others see in us. Of course, there are words we use and the manner in which we use them but it seems there is a lot more to it than that, IMO. Enlightenment, to me, is of no use if it does not allow the light of others to shine. In other words the offering of what you have within you in such a way that it is not regarded as an invasion or preachy . Let others make their own evaluations as they, unfettered, share in your presence. Call it an attitude/aura you have not only regarding yourself but the person you are engaged with.

To me it has everything to do with those engagements we have with other human beings. When we are alone, we are absolutely neutral, only slaves to our thoughts that can dull our senses if we let those thoughts overpower us. Such as trying to consciously do two things at once, like driving down the road talking on your cell phone, ha! We can only, consciously, do one thing "well" at any given moment. When we are alone and quiet so to speak, the mind and the senses are in tune with every thing around us and are subconsciously recording it all and responding to it without us "giving it a thought".

Are we positive or negative is, IMO, a state of mind in regard to the noise that surrounds us and there is a lot of that, no doubt, and we must remain quiet to it and not let it affect us. Now there are a lot of things we can do to control a lot of it other than putting on blinders and ear plugs, ha. For instance driving down the road; the only way you can truly allow your senses to perform well, is turn off your radio and all external input as much as possible, knowing you can't shut it all out especially if anyone else is with you in the car. You need your ears and eyes focused on the one thing you are doing; driving the car and all that entails or you stand the chance of crashing ; and they will automatically do that if the mind is quiet and undisturbed. It it, the mind, is "busy", preoccupied with other things it is "pondering" you are a dangerous risk on the highways, so to speak.

As I iterated, what truly matters in this world, IMO, are those engagements we have with other human beings. The quiet mind allows one's senses, to receive what the other is communicating; whether it be positive or negative to our own should not be "thought" about or it will create static in those sensory receivers and disrupt that communication or at least create resistance to it and wreck any understanding of it.

The quiet mind, IMO, is the positive mind and the busy mind is the negative one for it is thinking when it shouldn't be. As I have said so many times, "just leave it alone" for it will respond on it's own if we don't mess with it, extemporaneously. Call it impromptu, ad-libing, spur of the moment, off the cuff, to illustrate what I mean. It is truly one mind communicating with another in "harmony". Now if anyone we are engaged with says something we do not understand, or is contrary to what the other perceives, the negative mind and the senses lose "contact" and focus and subsequently stops hearing and starts thinking. We are so accustomed to looking for what is wrong, we can't hear the "right" they might be offered. It is the ego protecting itself against something it cannot hear for it has become accustom to what "it" knows within it own protective sphere.

IMO, the negative mind is "looking and listening" and the positive mind is "seeing and hearing". One is seeking, one is finding. One is growing, one is stagnating. One is dynamic, one is "static" and creates "interference", so to speak. So, as the Captain said in the movie COOL HAND LUKE, "What we have here, is a failure to communicate". Ha

In this domain of the "commuter keyboard" it is so very hard to communicate using words only. We must select the words we use, well.
I must admit, I am not an authority on it, but I strive to use words that are understandable and simple as I share that light/positive in me allowing others to realize the light/positive that is themselves. I think we all can be "positive" for that is what we truly are, only darkened by the noise and interference that surrounds us "if we allow it to". What if Descarte said "We think, therefore we are " Hmm? Something to think about, huh?

Now there are those who will "listen" to these words and try to find something wrong with them and "think" about ways to "convince" me to "their way of thinking", that negates any "right" that I might have said and, IMO, that is the negative person. The positive person will hear all I have to say, that which is right and "not so right", as it relates to what they hold in memory and what they perceive and will correspond to all of what I did say.

My thoughts on the matter, thanks for hearing.
William
 
Yogi DMT
 
Reply Tue 25 Aug, 2009 07:29 am
@glasstrees,
I think neutrally about this thought, not positive nor negative. I believe that's the way it should be. Negatively thinking about our existence, always trying to find a purpose is unhealthy and is a waste of your time because it's not a question with an answer. Thinking too positively about our existence doesn't make much sense to me because it seems like we're avoiding the truth which is we will live our lives and that will be it. In my opinion, there are two legacies people leave behind and that is what they contribute to mankind and how they affected other directly or indirectly. Really what any one person is in this vast ocean of chaos is what they have left behind in either contributions and the impact on others. My take on this question is don't be too negative yet being too positive may leave you following a false sense of purpose and therefore eventually leading you nowhere. Neutrally, your not thinking much about existence but simply living your living and getting the best out of it.
 
William
 
Reply Tue 25 Aug, 2009 11:01 am
@glasstrees,
Yogi DMT;85539 wrote:
I think neutrally about this thought, not positive nor negative. I believe that's the way it should be. Negatively thinking about our existence, always trying to find a purpose is unhealthy and is a waste of your time because it's not a question with an answer.


Well said, IMO.

Yogi DMT;85539 wrote:
Thinking too positively about our existence doesn't make much sense to me because it seems like we're avoiding the truth which is we will live our lives and that will be it.


In all due respect, to consciously "think" about what is positive is the problem and it comes from a personal perspective. In my opinion "positive" is a "natural" state, only influenced by the negatives it is exposed to if one listens to it. As you state, "...that will be it" is an assumption and it is a personal one for all do not assume as such. As the OP is efforting to determine, is that a positive notion or a negative one in that we have not established that as a truth. Very many believe we live our lives and that is "not it".

Yogi DMT;85539 wrote:
In my opinion, there are two legacies people leave behind and that is what they contribute to mankind and how they affected others directly or indirectly.


Might I suggest you alter the term "mankind" to "humankind" for one is a bit "lopsided", one is not. As far as he rest, I do agree except there is something to be said as to what that is "we carried forward" if you believe "that sort of thing"? I am of the belief what we carry forward is our "positive, natural, pure" mind and it depends on that temper of the collective state we arrive in and the influence is has over that collective that represents "all of us". If that overall collective is "negative", we are essentially in deep do do, so to speak or what you might call our wasted nature as we are not living up to our potential and burning it up such as can be witnessed in "our death". A very negative outcome if you only consider that you "left behind". That, too, is a bit lopsided, IMO.


Yogi DMT;85539 wrote:
Really what any one person is in this vast ocean of chaos.......


Yes, yogi, it appears to be chaotic, when it is, IMO, not at all. It is very simple, if fact. We only "think" it chaotic because we are subject to listening to so many "personal perceptions" that disturb that "natural state" in us, or that 'positive' state or that quiet state free of that "noise" that is indeed those personal perceptions of others that are imposed on us, IMO.

Yogi DMT;85539 wrote:
......is what they have left behind in either contributions and the impact on others. My take on this question is don't be too negative yet being too positive may leave you following a false sense of purpose and therefore eventually leading you nowhere. Neutrally, your not thinking much about existence but simply living your living and getting the best out of it.


Yes, yogi, one can't be too much of either as Goldilocks said, it needs to be "just right" or it's "natural state". Please consider "just right" has no meaning when there is a "best and worst" as you say "make the best of it". That immediately indicates someone must suffer the worst of it, right? For instance take the word "wealth". The antonym of it is "poverty". IMO, to reach that just right and natural state, we must do all we can to eliminate that antonym. If we consider them equal but separate dualities it creates a circular effect that is represent in the term stagnant and what goes around comes around and history does indeed repeat itself and that is what drove Nietzsche insane, among other things and also IMO.

For what it's worth Yogi, my two cents. :bigsmile:

William
 
Yogi DMT
 
Reply Wed 26 Aug, 2009 09:05 am
@William,
Quote:
In all due respect, to consciously "think" about what is positive is the problem and it comes from a personal perspective. In my opinion "positive" is a "natural" state, only influenced by the negatives it is exposed to if one listens to it. As you state, "...that will be it" is an assumption and it is a personal one for all do not assume as such. As the OP is efforting to determine, is that a positive notion or a negative one in that we have not established that as a truth. Very many believe we live our lives and that is "not it".
--- I agree except a positive outlook on life seems like an induced state due to, like you said, personal perspective and opinion. Neutral seems like a natural state because without any influence or thought we are simply just living our lives not wondering about a purpose and not being too optimistic about whatever false truths that come to comfort us. I understand where the idea of living our lives and that "not being it" comes from, to be honest it seems to come from people wanting to think that our only purpose is just to run our life's cycle through. Being realistic, that's physically and technically all there is to it.

But here's a thought i had before, is a positive outlook on life not questioning our existence or is it the idea of us have purpose beyond life and death. IMO neutrally looking at our existence is simply not wondering about a purpose.



Quote:
Might I suggest you alter the term "mankind" to "humankind" for one is a bit "lopsided", one is not. As far as he rest, I do agree except there is something to be said as to what that is "we carried forward" if you believe "that sort of thing"? I am of the belief what we carry forward is our "positive, natural, pure" mind and it depends on that temper of the collective state we arrive in and the influence is has over that collective that represents "all of us". If that overall collective is "negative", we are essentially in deep do do, so to speak or what you might call our wasted nature as we are not living up to our potential and burning it up such as can be witnessed in "our death". A very negative outcome if you only consider that you "left behind". That, too, is a bit lopsided, IMO.
--- In all fairness, yes it should be humankind. But our lives our short compared to the timeline of human history and the events that have ran their course. The future is vast compared to the present and past. Obviously, the past can only be used as a precedent for prediction and we will not be affecting the past. The present, our lifetime is relatively short, and this is when we will create our legacy and try to influence mankind. But in comparison, the largest part of who we are and what we accomplished will be evident in the future and depending on how much we have impacted society, what we leave behind for others may last forever or may only last as long as a little while after our death and then whither away.




Quote:
Yes, yogi, it appears to be chaotic, when it is, IMO, not at all. It is very simple, if fact. We only "think" it chaotic because we are subject to listening to so many "personal perceptions" that disturb that "natural state" in us, or that 'positive' state or that quiet state free of that "noise" that is indeed those personal perceptions of others that are imposed on us, IMO.
--- It is not chaotic, but because we over think and over analyze everything, we make it seem chaotic and since we establish reality then, it may very well be chaotic and infinitely mysterious.



Quote:
Yes, yogi, one can't be too much of either as Goldilocks said, it needs to be "just right" or it's "natural state". Please consider "just right" has no meaning when there is a "best and worst" as you say "make the best of it". That immediately indicates someone must suffer the worst of it, right? For instance take the word "wealth". The antonym of it is "poverty". IMO, to reach that just right and natural state, we must do all we can to eliminate that antonym. If we consider them equal but separate dualities it creates a circular effect that is represent in the term stagnant and what goes around comes around and history does indeed repeat itself and that is what drove Nietzsche insane, among other things and also IMO.
--- IMO a natural state is the state in which you have no opinion or do not give a certain subject any thought. When you generate opinions and preferences that when something can either be positive or negative. Your analogy states that wealth should be the natural state. I believe wealth is a positive and poverty, a negative. It really all depends on when you say natural, are you saying that's the way things should be, or that's the way things are originally realized.
 
manored
 
Reply Wed 26 Aug, 2009 10:18 am
@William,
William;85532 wrote:
If I might offer some food for thought we can all chew on. As we discuss positive/negative; isn't that the same thing as light/dark?
I prefer to not consider light positive and darkness negative, nor the other way around, because sometimes I want to move out of the light and in the dark, and sometimes I want to move out of the dark and in the light =)

William;85532 wrote:

The quiet mind, IMO, is the positive mind and the busy mind is the negative one for it is thinking when it shouldn't be. As I have said so many times, "just leave it alone" for it will respond on it's own if we don't mess with it, extemporaneously. Call it impromptu, ad-libing, spur of the moment, off the cuff, to illustrate what I mean. It is truly one mind communicating with another in "harmony". Now if anyone we are engaged with says something we do not understand, or is contrary to what the other perceives, the negative mind and the senses lose "contact" and focus and subsequently stops hearing and starts thinking. We are so accustomed to looking for what is wrong, we can't hear the "right" they might be offered. It is the ego protecting itself against something it cannot hear for it has become accustom to what "it" knows within it own protective sphere.
I dont get it, winhout thinking, how can communication even happen? It would be as talking into the microphone of a crashed computer: Being crashed, it will not process and record anything.

Yogi DMT;85539 wrote:
Thinking too positively about our existence doesn't make much sense to me because it seems like we're avoiding the truth which is we will live our lives and that will be it.
But, how to know if the positive view is not the truth, and that your neutral view is not actually negative? =)
 
William
 
Reply Wed 26 Aug, 2009 01:57 pm
@manored,
manored;85788 wrote:
I prefer to not consider light positive and darkness negative, nor the other way around, because sometimes I want to move out of the light and in the dark, and sometimes I want to move out of the dark and in the light =)


Thanks manored Let me see if I can relate what I meant better. I was using "light and dark" as metaphors for right and wrong as it is presumed we naturally know the difference as it relates to the choices we make. IMO, if we are left alone without "negative" inertia" being imposed on us from outside stimulus other than what we experience "naturally", we will always do the right thing, and that is what I call "god in motion" or being "tuned in" with that "universal collective consciousness" not only being protected from any "negativity" but also guided in it, "when needed". Without going into more detail, does that help?

manored;85788 wrote:
I dont get it, without thinking, how can communication even happen? It would be as talking into the microphone of a crashed computer: Being crashed, it will not process and record anything.


Very easily and spontaneously. You will be absolutely amazed at what you say, as am I so very, very often at what I communicate without giving it a second thought. Have you ever been engaged in an activity and all of a sudden you thought of something and you screwed up what you were doing? Ha! You know the old saying, "think long, think wrong"; IMO, there is a truth there. As far as the computer, think of another person you are speaking to and they only look as thought they are listening, when actually they are not hearing a word you have to say. Ha! Somehow we know they are not listening because we instinctively follow up a statement with "do you know what I mean", "understand", "here what I saying", "get it". Ha! Usually those statements begin with "Let me tell you something", at which time they begin to "crash". I can really get into this in much more detail. I hope this better explains what I mean. Instead to "talking at a person" you "communicate with a person".

William
 
hue-man
 
Reply Wed 26 Aug, 2009 02:04 pm
@glasstrees,
dwixi;72997 wrote:
I think this is a very important question.

Lots of people are negative about life not having any inerrant purpose. But I think it would suck if it did. Imagine if you existed and started out with a book of rules written by god telling us that we are here too... erm... create a soul for ourselves? And we keep living lives untill we get to the point of being a all loving perfect soul.... Something like that.
Im much happier with the idea that we can create (recognize our) purpose ourselves. It gives us alot more freedom.

Lots of people are also negative about the fact we are going to die anyway so whats the point? Thats an ego perspective. Its just your ego's natural reaction. People that think that arent looking hard enough. Life is a series of moments that are consciousness experiences. Some of these moments put in order give us the illusion that they are going in the direction of them coming to a stop (end). Time and memories create this delusional state. I think its very interesting our consciousness can experience things like being separate from other parts of it and how we would react with the illusion that it is going to stop one day.

This is my positive take on the main things that give people depression about existence. However I do often feel depressed and negative. But I use this as a sign i need to grow in that area. There are still fears and things i havnt faced at the back of my mind that I need to face so i can atleaset rationalise (understand) it.


My question to you is. Are you negative or positive about this figment we call existence?


I am generally positive about existence. I like to call myself a rational optimist. That means that I have a positive view of life, but I don't reject the fact that life sometimes has its dark moments, when hope seems far from reach and despair is ever near. However, the darker side of life can be reconciled by the fact that nature has no intent to harm us or anything else within it. Nature functions according to lawlike regularities, not volitional will, and so nature really doesn't care about us one or the other. Natural misfortune occurs for the same reason that natural fortune occurs; because there is no intent. In my opinion, the better side of life overshadows the darker side, and great insight and spiritual strength can come out of misfortune. This is the only life we have, and so we must affirm this life, its ups and its downs, if we are to truly value our existence and not fall victim to metaphysical nihilism.
 
Yogi DMT
 
Reply Wed 26 Aug, 2009 04:48 pm
@manored,
manored;85788 wrote:
But, how to know if the positive view is not the truth, and that your neutral view is not actually negative? =)
Well that all depends on what your perception of reality and existence is. I believe neutral thought is when you really don't generate too much opinion or thought on a particular matter. You're just uninvolved. Not to say that's negative but really just the lack of opinion. Negative and positive views on existence as we know it, could be up for debate even though it seems like there would be a common understanding of each.
 
manored
 
Reply Thu 27 Aug, 2009 12:21 pm
@William,
William;85823 wrote:
Thanks manored Let me see if I can relate what I meant better. I was using "light and dark" as metaphors for right and wrong as it is presumed we naturally know the difference as it relates to the choices we make. IMO, if we are left alone without "negative" inertia" being imposed on us from outside stimulus other than what we experience "naturally", we will always do the right thing, and that is what I call "god in motion" or being "tuned in" with that "universal collective consciousness" not only being protected from any "negativity" but also guided in it, "when needed". Without going into more detail, does that help?
I understand, I just really fell the necessity of avoiding the atribuition of concepts of good and evil to luminosity =)

William;85823 wrote:

Very easily and spontaneously. You will be absolutely amazed at what you say, as am I so very, very often at what I communicate without giving it a second thought. Have you ever been engaged in an activity and all of a sudden you thought of something and you screwed up what you were doing? Ha! You know the old saying, "think long, think wrong"; IMO, there is a truth there. As far as the computer, think of another person you are speaking to and they only look as thought they are listening, when actually they are not hearing a word you have to say. Ha! Somehow we know they are not listening because we instinctively follow up a statement with "do you know what I mean", "understand", "here what I saying", "get it". Ha! Usually those statements begin with "Let me tell you something", at which time they begin to "crash". I can really get into this in much more detail. I hope this better explains what I mean. Instead to "talking at a person" you "communicate with a person".
I think I understand what you mean, but we adress it in opposite ways =)

What you are telling me is what I call "listening", while you seem to give the word an opposite meaning.

Yogi DMT;85854 wrote:
Well that all depends on what your perception of reality and existence is. I believe neutral thought is when you really don't generate too much opinion or thought on a particular matter. You're just uninvolved. Not to say that's negative but really just the lack of opinion. Negative and positive views on existence as we know it, could be up for debate even though it seems like there would be a common understanding of each.

I agree, but I think a neutral view is not necessarly a true one.
 
G-Thomson
 
Reply Thu 27 Aug, 2009 01:24 pm
@manored,
I'd say that a neutral view would be the least biased.
For example, if you start out with a negative outlook on life, your opinions on most issues would likey skew to the negative side of things. The same with a positive outlook.
But if you began with a neutral view, THEN you could more accurately decide whether a certain aspect is a negative or positive thing, compared with your neutrality.
 
Twistedgypsychil
 
Reply Thu 27 Aug, 2009 05:33 pm
@glasstrees,
I think that in order for one to be positive about our existence, they also have to be negative because without one there is no other.

Jamie
 
William
 
Reply Thu 27 Aug, 2009 06:43 pm
@manored,
manored;86061 wrote:
What you are telling me is what I call "listening", while you seem to give the word an opposite meaning.


No, not really. It's just listening requires effort, hearing does not, IMO. Listening requires a conscious effort to understand where as hearing comes easy and automatically. Let me give you an example. Have you every been among a group of people all speaking from the "I" perspective and really got bored and your mind sorta drifted and all of a sudden someone will say something you "tune in to" and you "heard" that but very little else? That is what I call "divine sensation". You heard it because you were meant to hear it simply because it was complimentary with something you held in memory that could "tie up a loose end". Surely I am not the only one who has experienced that? When we try to listen, it is easy to lose focus because it is harder to listen than it is to hear. It can also be said we only listen to that we "want" to listen to. Hearing, we have no choice. IMO.

William
 
 

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 10/19/2021 at 01:12:12