Ambition, lack thereof, and why we do anything.

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

When you do something to help others, they feel good, and they are also encouraged to be good themselves. At the same time, you feel good, and you also gain more strength to resist your own negative or entropic tendencies. It's technically selfish, but at the point where we call that "selfish" when doing precisely the opposite is "much more selfish", it's saying there is nothing that isn't selfish. That may be the case, but clearly there is a way of thinking, speaking and doing (i.e. being) that is the least selfish we can be. That's the one we go for, because, well, the alternative makes others and you feel bad, and as an ideology, is a literal dead end street.

That’s exactly the kind of thing I was thinking of putting in there. A sort of basic logical breakdown in simple language. People already know the concept of good vs evil but no one ever explain to them an objective way of looking at it. It’s always either religion or movies that treat the concepts in the most childish way. I don’t think STO vs STS is arbitrary matter of the heart with no logic. I think STO is actually the more logical one, and it requires discarding logic and rationality to be STS. In fact I think that’s part of why no one who is truly STO ever goes back to being STS. The benefits, even just for the self, are incomparable. Never mind that they extend to everyone else and compound. STS ends up hurting itself and others.

When you think of giving - you have to ask what you should be giving, how to give, when to give, to whom, and when not giving is actually giving and why. Intuitively people often know some of these things without realizing it or consistently applying them in their life - that depriving a child of 3 pounds of candy he wants is a loving act for example. The booklet can be called “The Art and Science of Giving”, because I think that’s a major hang up for most people. Or like “How to prevent good intentions from paving the way to hell” or something. People’s heart it often in the right place, but as the C’s say, we confuse many things as love that have nothing to do with it. But yet we still cling to the idea that love and goodness is important as a race - we just can’t seem to zero in on it, because no one teaches you what love is and how to love. Your parents and teachers and all the media kinda just shrug and sometimes get close, sometimes miss the mark. You kinda have to put it together yourself as you live. Like 90% of music is about love, or someone’s idea of it. Hell, the booklet can be called “What is Love? Baby Don’t Hurt Me!”.

I don’t think these things are rocket science, they’re just elusive because no one wants the objective concepts escaping into the wild and actually making people and the world better. There are some books and movies that come pretty close - V for Vendetta shows what love is, and what it can lead to and how.

I totally agree that a spiritual bankruptcy is important to truly wake up - but I’d say that it isn’t so black and white - if the Science of Evil (Political Ponerology) can benefit people, why not the science of goodness, love, and STO? It’s important to understand how to not be a victim of manipulators and liars and gaslighters and psychopaths by examine their modus operandi and your mind’s susceptibility to their machinations. But it kinda goes hand in hand with how not to do evil while intending good. Most psychopaths convince people they they’re doing good when they’re really doing their evil bidding. How can that be? Well, cuz no one really knows what good really is.

Come to think of it, the Romantic Fiction books are kind of a lesson on love, and maybe they already serve a lot of that explanatory purpose with prose. So perhaps this would be partly redundant. I dunno. I do like the idea of distilling it even more if that’s even possible or desirable.

 

[whitecoast]

Anyway, just an idea. I'll compile my thoughts and put together a rough draft in this thread the best I can (may take me a few days to do) - let me know if this is a fruitless exercise, or if the idea is dumb, or whatever. All thoughts, help, criticism, etc obviously welcome.

I think it would be a good exercise for you. If others benefit then all the better.

 

[Lukasz]

Let's look at STO. You serve self through others. You give all to those who ask. Why would this motivate someone?

I would suggest that there's no need for motivation at all. Because would it be really STO if there would be a reason for a behavior?

Motivation is the reason for acting, and suggests a reward of some kind, so this comes to mind:

A: Want is an STS concept.

Q: So, you seem to be suggesting that the real trick is to just become non-attached to anything and anybody, do nothing, and just dissolve into nothing? No thought, no want, no do, no be, no anything!

A: If you are STS, that does not fit, but, if you did exactly that, you would reincarnate in an STO realm, where such energy does fit.

So I imagine that STO does everything because it's natural for the individual, so without any conscious motivation.

So my thought was - there ought to be an instruction manual for STO. At the end of the day, there is no reason to do anything unless you are properly motivated, and the motivation comes from the heart, but without guidance, that's how well-meaning people hurt themselves and others, get taken advantage of by manipulators, etc.

Assuming this is one big school and all there is is lessons isn't it normal, and maybe even necessary, that well-meaning people hurt themselves and others, get taken advantage of by manipulators, etc.? Aren't these just the opportunities to grow?

In my opinion, we are given opportunities to learn the hows and whys of STO all the time. When you look around, it looks like the Universe is poking on everyone and whispering to their ears: "Wake up, wake up, grow up..."

And probably there comes a moment for many (not necessarily in this life) when something hits like a ton of bricks, and from that moment the nature of the person changes. And that moment of waking up, as well as many other things, is probably determined by the position of each individual on the learning cycle.

This quote from the C's may be relevant:

Q: (L) What is it that gives some people this drive, this steamroller effect that they are determined to get to the absolute bottom of everything and strip away every lie until there is nothing left but the naked truth? What is the source of this desire?

A: Wrong concept. It is simply that one is at that point on the learning cycle. At that point, no drive is needed.

So in my opinion, if an individual is at that point on the learning cycle, no manual is needed and natural order of things allows the person to find all the necessary information however deep it would be hidden. At least this is how I see it FWIW

 

[Pearce]

I also had the urge recently to compile something similar, trying to integrate the esoteric while keeping it as practical as possible. I went through the why’s in my head and landed on the same idea as above: that it would at base level be a useful project for me to organize my thoughts, and if it ever served anyone else then all the better.

I was thinking in terms of writing something that could aid in discernment or perspective and what I’ve come up with so far is that for me at least, the best way I can try to stay objective is to look at everything through four lenses, the more at one time I can look through the more objective I feel I see. The biggest hurdle, if I can call it that, that I see is that a lot of people don’t see the incentive to look at themselves. They think the problems are always out there, and I address this more at the bottom but until people can say “these modes of thinking and being aren’t working, and I have those traits in me too so I need to change them” then we’re just going to continue off the cliff we most likely have already jumped off. We’re falling and we think we’re flying.

Anyway, the overall theme is As Above So Below, As Within So Without, and the lenses are broken into four categories which I’ve categorized as
• The Macro
• The Micro
• The Moment
• The Dynamic

The Macro is all the big stuff: outer space sciences and physics, astronomy/ology, dimensions and densities, etc. While I may not know a whole lot about these things, it boils down to at least reminding myself that for instance, 4D has a high likelihood of being in existence, and all that implies. For me this lens is maybe foggy, but it’s always there!

The Micro is the small stuff, the biologies and health and diet, microbiomes and all that. Basically just knowing from a health standpoint what is going on at your molecular level that could be contributing to whatever it is you’re trying to see objectively.

The Moment is the human level – our societies, religions and mythologies, pathology and psychology, education and basically just the general state of things. The big things I’ve highlighted so far in putting this together are that you always have to ask “what’s the story, who is telling the story, and who benefits from the story?” You also have to more than anything be willing to and constantly be questioning yourself, specifically your thought patterns and beliefs. Second-guessing yourself isn’t what I mean either, but to always be looking for a different viewing angle in your approach to situations and beliefs. Since this is the biggest category it needs the most hammering out of the details.

The Dynamic is basically STS vs STO. Is [insert action here] creative or destructive? Does it seem to enrich all or does it seek to control? Is it adaptive and flexible or rigid and narrow in scope? I also went into a section on the Seven Deadly Sins vs the Holy Virtues, cause they really hit the nail on the head as far as descriptions go. Not because God said so, but because now it is very clearly evident what the end result of not practicing the virtues is. We’ve reached the point where there is no other option left but to change ourselves if we wish to keep living. To me, I no longer see collective problems. I see a bunch of individuals with problems. Just like there isn’t a thing unto itself such as “ten marbles.” There are ten individual marbles that together make a collection, but without the distinct part called a marble, you can’t have ten of them. Likewise you can’t have collective problems unless the individuals have the problems, therefore the “solution” to the “collective ills” lies sorely within yourself, by choosing differently in every moment a response or attitude or point of view than what you’ve chosen before.

That’s as far as I’ve gotten in my own attempt so it’s still very simplified, but the essence is try to remember all four perspectives and try to combine them when searching for answers. The rest is all up to each person in each moment. Hope it’s helpful at all to your thoughts.

Perhaps a guide on Practical Conscious Suffering would be useful, if there is such a thing

 

[genero81]

Anyway, the overall theme is As Above So Below, As Within So Without, and the lenses are broken into four categories which I’ve categorized as
• The Macro
• The Micro
• The Moment
• The Dynamic

That's good although I would use different terminology if it were me. (which it's not)
The Cosmos
The Body
The Now
The Orientation (dynamic though the interplay may be)

 

[Pearce]

@genero81
Yeah the idea is the same, whatever is easiest for people to remember. When I first started with Macro and Micro, I wanted to keep the M theme, so I put the Moment and wanted to put the Movement for the fourth, as in orientation or "which way are you moving", but I thought it was too close to Moment just being a few letters off.. so dynamic it became as to highlight the interplay in each choice

 

[Jones]

The C's say it's when one makes the choice that counts. The thing about making a choice to become STO is that there is the included idea that we are STS at the moment. That's a clever device for more awareness of the ways in which we are not STO, and also in which we are STS. Then with that awareness, we are given more and more experiences where we can make a choice as we learn where we may not have even been aware that there was one to be made before. So in a sense, what the C's have said actually increases free will. What a gift that is - a key to the fundamental law of the universe! All from that one simple sentence - it's when you make the choice that counts. Of course that doesn't mean that we will all of a sudden be able to avoid making regrettable choices - growth is a process and not an event in most cases.

What the above basically shows is that there is STS and STO on opposite ends of the spectrum, but in between there is the period of growth - either one way or the other. And that reminds me of this from Gurdjieff:

"Blessed is he who has a soul, blessed is he who has none, but woe and grief to him that has it in embryo" - it addresses the growing pains.

Ultimately I think that if there were a clear guide, then the process would become more linear and risk loss of choice, probably protect levels of anticipation, or moving away from freewill because things would still be mechanical instead of non-linear and flexible when taking into account the law of three - the good, the bad and the context that determines which is which. A guidebook probably couldn't cover every single context there is. I mean, I doubt that there has ever been an esoteric text that has suggested reading romantic fiction - but boy isn't that helpful for our times?!

 

[Joe]

STS ends up hurting itself and others.

More than that, STS is fundamentally focused on the self as the center of all things. Naturally, someone like that is irritated by the difference from the self that others represent. That irritation, if nurtured, can grow to become hatred and contempt for the other. If enough power is accrued by such a person, they will seek to minimize to the greatest possible extent the difference of others to themselves. This initially leads to finding ways to force others to act like them, but since that isn't realistic, it becomes a desire that others not act very much at all, that they simply be as quiet and 'unannoying' as possible.

But it's not possible for others to not express their own individuality and creativity, so anger and contempt eventually grows to the point of wanting to exterminate 'the other' completely. If enough power is accrued, this might become possible to some extent, but the ultimate wish must eventually become that only the self exists. That would 'solve all the problems' because then 'peace' is achieved...but it is?

If such a person were the only one left in existence, they would likely become irritated with their own existence. This then provokes a wish for complete oblivion or nothingness, including for the self. So the ultimate expression of STS is non-existence, which cannot exist. So yeah, STS essentially defines the word "stupid".

 

[Joe]

A: Want is an STS concept.

Q: So, you seem to be suggesting that the real trick is to just become non-attached to anything and anybody, do nothing, and just dissolve into nothing? No thought, no want, no do, no be, no anything!

A: If you are STS, that does not fit, but, if you did exactly that, you would reincarnate in an STO realm, where such energy does fit.

The above description might have needed more development, because the idea of "no anything" is the wish of STS.

 

[Kmicic]

The above description might have needed more development, because the idea of "no anything" is the wish of STS.

I don't like STS but reading things like this about STO make me feel that I don't know who I want to be and how could I became being like that, In my head bumps questions like "Will I be still myself? Will I be happy of that change?"

 

[Turgon]

I think it would be a good exercise for you. If others benefit then all the better.

Agreed. We all need reminders and guideposts along the way and having someone putting together their thoughts and ideas regarding what it means to be STO in an STS world without over-complicating it too much could probably be helpful to those who are in struggle. It's certainly not meant as a replacement for the forum and networking, but it still could be a labour of love and a means to give back. I often turn to Gurdjieff's 82 Rules to Life, Usui's 5 Principles and different Stoic quotes to help figure out where I am in the moment and coming back to what's of real value in life. So you never know how what you write will 'click' with others and turn the light switch on for them.

My 2 cents.

 

[Turgon]

A: Want is an STS concept.

Q: So, you seem to be suggesting that the real trick is to just become non-attached to anything and anybody, do nothing, and just dissolve into nothing? No thought, no want, no do, no be, no anything!

A: If you are STS, that does not fit, but, if you did exactly that, you would reincarnate in an STO realm, where such energy does fit.

The above description might have needed more development, because the idea of "no anything" is the wish of STS.

I've always wondered about that quote. Because it can relate to Gurdjieff's concept of non-identification as well as the Buddhist concept of non-attachment and both can be practical modes of being in that if you aren't too attached to what you have or how you feel, etc. and can let it go, it's like letting go of your self-importance and identification with material objects and notions of ones self, emotions, that are mainly projections, illusions or destructive to one's self. But then like you said, how does 'no anything' fit into this?

Going by what the C's have also said about 'knowledge input on a continuous basis' and the necessity of 'giving and doing' to generate a vacuum to allow new energy to come in, which certainly doesn't sound like 'no anything'. Then there is what Gurfjieff (and Jordan Peterson) have said about having aims and goals in life to work towards and in the case of the latter that working towards those aims is what generates positive emotions that can spiral you upwards as it builds upon itself and can generate momentum and develop a meaning to one's life.

Maybe it's walking a fine line. Where you are motivated to do and accomplish and that it's of benefit to other people, Laura's work is a prime example and the forum is one of the results of that that's brought so many people together, then it's rewarding and sustaining at a level that 'feeds the soul' and helps others, but the danger comes if your ego gets in the way and it becomes all about the self. Or rather in an STS world, the motivation for most things is egoistic to begin with but part of what it means to move closer towards STO is to let go and not attach yourself to those drives and let them pass you by so they don't hook into you and find a deeper meaning to what you are doing because you can see what you are doing is necessary, adds to knowledge of the world is and meant to benefit others, and that is the 'ambitious' or driving force behind it.

 

[Lukasz]

The above description might have needed more development, because the idea of "no anything" is the wish of STS.

Thank you Joe for pointing that out. I didn't want to sound like I was suggesting that "no anything" is an STO idea.

I think the main take from that quote is that STO is devoid of any desire for the self. I perceive an STO candidate as a person that does a lot by giving to others but doesn't intentionally look for the opportunities to give. At least that's how I understand it.

 

[sid]

Thanks @Joe for explicating the STS mindset in such simple terms.

I feel that by way of studying more and more about STS, the pathway to STO becomes clearer without any handbook per se. STS seeks to unify all and everything via assimilation and consumption into an idealised whole entity by determining “whats best for others” aligned to achieving the maximum “best” for the self. STO seeks to become creative and enlightened, and then find the best possible means to express that creativity whilst letting others do the same for themselves.

Hence, by their intent and action, STS represents the contracting reality where opportunities of creative expression are progressively diminished hence, there’s an overall reduction of true knowledge within such realm. All and everything they know is stolen and second hand knowledge from the STO creative entities. They wish to remove the “Intelligence” from the “Intelligent Design”. Our current realm and planet is an excellent example of the diminishment of human potential that has occurred over recent few thousands of years.

An STO candidate first and foremost learns to determine whats best for others and the self without conflicts of interest. This is specific to each situation hence there are no templates to follow. In a way, I see handbooks and templates to be limiting objects utilised by STS factions. In a universe full of unlimited possibilities, I see the STO pathway to resonate more with all such possibilities and allow propagation of the same to have unique experiences. And it’s the unique experiences and situations which are best testing grounds for STO candidates.

And, if there shall exist a guiding principle on how to be an STO, it should first start with asking the seeker to learn to “be and let others be“. And, its the level of understanding and application of this principle which determines how close to being an STO the said seeker is.
OSIT!

 

[monotonic]

As I understand STO is a higher density concept that we cannot fully understand. Therefore, when we rid ourselves of STS motivations and concepts that limit us to a linear thought process, we allow inspiration to come in from higher realms. So then maybe instead of following a checklist or guide and essentially trying to be STO through a mechanical process, you will begin to have creative ideas which bring more possibilities to the table than could be found in a checklist.

Follow any mystery deep enough and you will find that not only do you not have the answer, but you do not even have the question. And where do questions come from in their most sincere form? Intuition and inspiration. A good answer may satisfyingly end the question, but a good question leads to discovery and possibilities. And finding questions requires creativity.

If you are trying to understand someone else, good questions are of immense value. When you find a good question you discover things about them you could not have even thought of.

I suppose that when you ask a question, what you receive is often more than just the answer.