You can't think if you're dead, and instincts are pretty useful to forestall one's premature demise.
Thank you Paul. If I might offer since we have no idea of what "dead" truly represents only that it is "the end", we must "not" think about it, IMO. You are so right if we "rely" on our instincts and "do" what comes natural to us, we will "think" much clearly and harmonically with all that surrounds us. That, in and of itself, "forestalls" any thought pertaining to ones demise premature or otherwise. If we "imagine" such a premature demise, we become afraid, and think "we" can "control" such an event from happening and in that process we stop doing what is natural, we start "thinking" of ways we can prevent it clogging the senses altering their perception and putting us in harm's way.
It's humorous to me. Rationalization in a unknown area is perfectly normal, so that you can bring it into an understanding. I myself seek a balance of thought and instinct, so I cannot rely on one or the other too much.
Right Dunker. Now what represents that "unknown"? Anything we don't know for sure, right! Only the senses and their relationship to what is present in your personal domain can truly establish that and represent what you truly can witness, physically touch, hear, smell and taste. We, I might offer, should not be forced to "control" that for it is natural for our (self)'s benefit. Only when we are "forced" to control it as we encounter others in that domain do we create conflict as they are efforting to control "it" also for "their" benefit". That, in and of itself, "creates" chaos, confusing altering what the senses would naturally receive as "input" as we are force to "rationalize/think" what to do. To understand something will come "easily" in such a way your will not "forget" it and will be permanently logged in memory for it is "complimentary" with all else that is held there in that memory. When we force something to memory, it creates confusion in that memory and is evident in the output of he that "has" those memories as they question what is on their mind, so to speak, as they interrogate others seeking answers that will harmonize those memories. If every one does that, imagine all the chaos it can create. (My list) for example.
Hi, I see the two are related and a continuum.
Instincts are the some total of experience and knowledge accumulated.
Not necessarily, if you don't mind
. (That very statement I just made is "complimentary" to the above quote you made as I would like to offer my thoughts to that matter and tacitly asking permission to "offer" my thoughts "on" that matter "you" expressed.)
In all "fairness" I should not continue unless you give me permission to do so, but I will anyway, Ha! Sorry, please forgive me. Ha, Referring to what you did say pertaining to that continuum, I disagree in that what the senses receive that "are" harmonic will enhance that continuum, but,
not all knowledge held in memory we are force to retain to exist in this reality is harmonic, not only to us individually, but to others and what they have in memory. It can really get confusing if we don't know how to communicate using "complimentary" processes.
Thinking is the processing of new experiences which ultimately is additive to Instincts. So the two work together.
Thanks again Rich, please allow me to differ. Only if those "new" experiences are complimentary with what is "already" held in memory will they become a part of "natural instinct". IMO, you can't force them to "stay" there for your own benefit and "make" them fit. It's just not "natural", IMO.
Again, that's what I think; now I am open to what you think. Ha. I look forward as you express what is in your memory that would differ from what is in mine so we can complimentary communicate better. :bigsmile: