Nick_A wrote: ↑July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pm
Sy Borg
Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 4:43 pm
Jesus represents the inner path to wholeness while Judas supports the descent into fragmentation.
Not at all.
Jesus and Judas were not a double act, diametric opposites. Jesus and Satan is the correct match up. Judas was just a patsy for the Romans, a dupe. The morals behind the myth of Jesus and Judas relate to trust, loyalty and how fear can lead to betrayals.
Also, liberalism has nothing to do with fragmentation. Exactly the opposite, it's about inclusiveness and freedom.
I am defining liberalism and conservatism by world views rather than politics. I begin with the Holy Trinity. The Father is ONE outside of creation and No-thing. The Son is every-thing within creation. The spirit is what unites them at different vertical levels so is the source of meaning.
I understand the universe as an interconnected giant octave. Each note along this octave is a level of reality along a vertical descending octave.
You need to use different language. The use of intensely political terms like "conservative" and "liberal" to describe the structure of people's character is, with all due respect, misleading and riddled with personal bias.
There is no set world view of conservatives and liberals, as you state. There have been studies showing that "conservatives" are more vigilant, fearful and less intelligent on average than "liberals". Trouble is, just as with race, the differences and diversity within the factions is greater than the differences between the factions.
Those who seek peace and unity in life do not reside on one side of the political spectrum. Those who choose to specialise on fragments of reality rather than try to understand the whole do not reside on one part of the political spectrum.
I get it that politics excites you and you like to paint your ideological opponents as limited, shallow and mindless. It's an old game. At present a faction of conservatives are presenting liberals as people who kill babies and consume their essence, like a cross between Soylent Green and Jupiter Ascending. However, there are also conservatives who see Qanon and the like as bonkers.
Okay, now lets' check the schema.
1. The "Father", you say, is nothingness. To double check, is this inclusive of the cosmic foam, of virtual particles, or are you referring to complete nothingness (which necessarily and logically does not exist)? Broadly, nothingness (or as close to nothing as possible) would appear to be the source of everything, the hyperspace out of which the universe inflated.
2. The "Son" is everything, all the stuff. Creation. Matter and energy, life and minds. All the Son.
3. The "spirit", which unites them. Since you have made clear that you feel zero unity with "liberals" - about half the human race - so whatever your means of accessing the spirit, at this stage it does not appear to be working. Do you believe that love and understanding have a valid place in this schema?
I have never heard conservatives speaking about this in public. This is not about conservatism, nor the nature of conservatives. My father and his pals were arch conservatives and they would be dismissive of your claims. As I say, you need different language. Not all conservatives are devout, not all liberals are secular. Confusing these concepts is not helpful.
Also, perhaps you can explain your point about how the spirit unites God and creation vertically? That seems to me more of a Lane idea than a Gurdjeiff concept, such as his law of octaves.
Nick_A wrote: ↑July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmSome people are attracted to return to the whole. They desire to conserve what is being lost or forgotten.
All people want this. They just use different words to express it, usually a wish for peace and harmony.
Nick_A wrote: ↑July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmOthers become enchanted with details or fragments so are unconcerned with the whole and concentrate on fragments, details, or parts of the whole. I call this the liberal mind.
No, it's called analysis. It has nothing at all to do with "the liberal mind". Chunking is what analysts do. You look at a dynamic and want to understand it, be able to predict it. So you study the dynamic and better understand its underlying drivers.
Ultimately, your theistic criticism of science is dated. It's well-known the siloing of scientific fields is an impediment to a broader understanding. So, today, for example, we can see the logical absurdity of non-living geology giving birth to living biology - that geology and biology are each part of a larger process. Hence the emerging field of geobiology.
Thing is, life requires analysis of parts. There is no way around it. That's why meditation and contemplation exist - having free time from the exigencies of specific analyses to consider the whole, to take time out to simply be, rather than do. It's healing.
Nick_A wrote: ↑July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmIt defines meaning by arguing fragments The atheistic mind would be a liberal mind since it denies in whatever form, a source for the octave of creation.
Trouble is, many atheists are conservative and many theists are liberal. You think that billions of people fit neatly into two categories - 1. conservative/religious/whole/righteous and 2. liberal/secular/incomplete/wicked. Do you appreciate how anti-philosophical that is? Paula White would love it.
Nick_A wrote: ↑July 15th, 2021, 3:50 pmThe Conservative mindset (non political) is drawn to return to the white light while the liberal mind seeks new colors
An evolved human being is capable of both. They receive the impressions of higher consciousness and give these awakening influences to below. Facts and values can then be united as a part of the universal mind rather than a mind in the prison of Plato's Cave
Certainly in the US, plenty with conservative mindsets prefer whiteness to colour. No argument there.
Still, all you are ultimately advocating is meditation about the whole to be incorporated into one's life, something that arguably is more likely of liberals than conservatives. I was raised in a conservative family amongst conservatives in one of the most conservative suburbs in the country. So, unlike you, I have enormous real life experience with those on the other side of the political spectrum.
That real life experience is why I don't paint conservatives as soulless and insensitive dummies, as you seem to paint secularists. I don't relate to black-and-white views of a multi-textured reality.