Being Good at Something

[Tigersoap]

It just reminded me of don juan and his whole 'self-importance thing' which to me again has lit a new bulb with regard to my feeling of 'unworthiness' be it not 'worthlessness.' This is essentially due to self-importance. I am being to 'self-important' about this feeling of worthiness or unworthiness. Ok, hopefully progress. I am identifying to much with 1 of my I's. The so-called false personality...

Hi Luke,

The way I see it, even if you were "good at something" you'd still feel unworthy of being good at it.
Maybe you'd keep seeing all the things that you don't do right and beat you up with that.

When you think of it some people have a talent, either be sport, singing or cooking, but that does not necessarily make them better persons.
It's who you are and what you do consequently of who you are that matters imho.
We're so used to take the measure of who we are only through what we do, own or believe we've achieved, nevermind that we're not in control of our actions.

Talent it's not always something that happens magically to you either, you need to cultivate it, yeah maybe you won't be the best in your field but that does not mean that it cannot be "worth" something to you or others.

It takes time to understand our own narcissistic woundings and healing them so be patient and take care of yourself.

 

[Dorothy Minder]

Hi Luke,

Sometimes we gain perspective by stepping back, and sometimes by diving in (to say nothing of stepping out, going under, etc.). Since you started the thread with a discussion about particular talents like music, sports, academics, etc., and haven't really found clarity there, it might be useful to step back.

Consider all that a warning that what I'm about to say may be "imbecilic" (using Don Juan's framework). :)

Broadly speaking, I think one of the challenges we face in "the work" is balancing the notions of: 1) The confidence of illimitable being, and 2) the humility of universal equality.

It's not easy to reconcile the infinite possibilities of our own mind with being no more important than a hunk of concrete, but it seems an important understanding. [Not one I've mastered by any means. Lately I seem to have had too much confidence and not enough humility.]

Like Tigersoap said, "When you think of it some people have a talent, either be sport, singing or cooking, but that does not necessarily make them better persons."

Do you feel an urge to be "good at something" or "better than others" in a relative sense? Can you be you? Maybe if you shed the weight of social comparison and competition, you'll discover a lightness of being that dramatically increases your effectiveness in certain ways. That might mean a particular, identifiable talent. Or perhaps you will discover that your talents, rather than being particular activities or social roles, instead seem to fit the situation at hand, dynamically, and are thus very hard to define.

Like Gimpy said: "My point is that no one has to be good at just one thing, or fit into any of the currently held categories that define people these days."

Given the abstract lean of this post so far, I'll try to introduce some balance by echoing what seem to me very useful, practical insights by other members:

Talent it's not always something that happens magically to you either, you need to cultivate it, yeah maybe you won't be the best in your field but that does not mean that it cannot be "worth" something to you or others.

I strongly feel the mental/emotional/physical detoxification methods can help us get back our motivation to act in favor of our destinies.

Why should you not do the things you love simply because you don't have a natural talent for them?.... If we had to be geniuses or immensely naturally talented at something to do it, then I don't think much would ever get done.

As you continue on your journey of self-discovery, you may find yourself discovering and appreciating the gifts that you have and thus developing the healthy kind of self-confidence.

When you get tired of banging your head against that particular wall Luke, you'll stop. ;)

Take care!

 

[tom32071]

I'm fair to middlin' at a lot of things but not really good at anything. I don't mind though. I haven't really found anything that I really sparkle at.
Oh well, jack of all trades, master of none. I don't feel like you really have to be great at anything. :)

 

[herondancer]

Or perhaps you will discover that your talents, rather than being particular activities or social roles, instead seem to fit the situation at hand, dynamically, and are thus very hard to define.

This is an important point to try to remember. As one who strove for many years to excel in a very competitive field, it was a hard lesson to come to the understanding that physical talent was, in the end, the deciding factor, not necessarily how hard one worked. But the knowledge gained from that effort has had applications I never dreamed of. So though you may never set the world on fire in your activities, you can still do the things you love, whether acting, or music, or what have you, just for the pleasure of doing them. Who knows how the knowledge you gain will be of value to others. Nothing is ever wasted.

Life, as they say, is short! So , or , or , or is fun!

 

[Bar Kochba]

Gurdjieff said that talent was nothing special, that anyone can do anything anyone else can do, if they work properly. So I wouldnt sweat that aspect of it. I personally have found this to be true in my own life. You can do anything anyone else can do, and learn to do it well.

 

[mkrnhr]

When i was a kid i used to watch TV movies. The main message was: everyone has a particular talent, and if we discover which one it is, then we can become number one of that thing. So how many talents are there to how many people?

In fact, we are talented at what we do with our lives, with ourselves. We are talented (or not) in being, not necessarily in doing things that are separated from our being. I think that's another social conditioning we got through the mass media in the century of self. The result has been just a few millions of frustrations, and maybe a diversion from inner work.

 

[Aidylsun B.]

What, exactly, does it mean to be talented? Does it mean that someone is good enough at a something to be paid to perform as in a singer, an actor or an athlete? Because if it does, then I know only a few people who are able to make a living at their talents (or gifts) but I know plenty of folks who have “made it” because of their desire, hard work and perseverance. These people include doctors, lawyers, carpenters, teachers, gardeners, etc. – all talented and who do their jobs well.

Does being talented mean that someone is paid for his or her talent? You may know people who are good thinkers, listeners, team leaders or even good a making you laugh when you really need one.

There are talents out there that I’ve only recently heard of like a dog whisperer and fast text messengers. It seems to me that there’s an adventure in finding our talents and in discovering our gifts.

Here's hoping that we're not measured by our talents but by who we are and what we stand for.

 

[luke wilson]

Thanks for the input.

This thread is in a way teaching me that, things are way more dynamic, complex than I first thought. Or rather atleast bringing that new aspect into my scope of thinking.

What do I mean?

Well, I had an idea of what talent was. This idea in a way is programmed by society. Eg talent at singing, dancing etc etc. I would say, a 'rigid' idea or definition about talent was encrusted upon my mind.

However, my new understanding of talent is something much more dynamical. I cannot describe it properly because I dont understand it. I can only see a glimmer of it mainly thanks to the input received from others.

Do you feel an urge to be "good at something" or "better than others" in a relative sense?

Yes and no. There is an aspect that I suppose does get affected by how it is perceived by others. It wants praise, it takes other peoples impression to heart. I suppose it is the 'ego' element.

There is another side that just wants to 'be.' It looks at something and see's a possibility, an exciting possibilty and it wants to reach that possibility. It wants to get there and touch it, experience it, express it, see the world through it etc.

However, between the 2 different sides, there is a relationship, maybe the 3rd force according to mouravieff that determines what is.

I dont understand how the dynamics work but I know in the end, the result, atleast for me is frustration. Where neither side actually achieves its goal. The 1st element doesnt get its praise and the 2nd element doesnt get to experience its dream.

Can you be you?

Depends what you mean by me.

I can't be me. I can't actualise one element of me. There is always conflict between the different elements. The ego doesnt have full spectrum control, neither does the essence or soul. What I am finding is that, the situation of 1 having ultimate control is not possible or desirable. What is required is the personality and its varied parts, to get to a level where it can be an instrument of the soul or essence and that leaves out the 'outside' world and what kind of 'effect' it can have on the whole organism. This whole situation I believe is the whole point of life. So I cant be me but I am working on it.

Maybe if you shed the weight of social comparison and competition, you'll discover a lightness of being that dramatically increases your effectiveness in certain ways.

True, a lesson for the personality to learn. A lesson yet to be learnt or realised.

The way I see it, even if you were "good at something" you'd still feel unworthy of being good at it.
Maybe you'd keep seeing all the things that you don't do right and beat you up with that.

True, if I can see a blemish, I suppose one will never be satisfied. I dont know why but it seems some of the goals set by oneself are beyond anythng achievable. It is like there is a really deep inner desire to 'honour' something.

I dont see 'talents' or 'abilities' as there own thing. I see them as a living force. An entity in its own right and us doing it, we are entering into the domain of something else. Basically another house and there is the desire to honour that house. It's something transcendental, it something that I definately dont own. Not my talent. Rather a gift. I dont own any talents maybe one day a trillion lifetimes or incarnations down the road i'll be a talent in my own right.

I am starting to see every single thing, things represented by words or ideas or thoughts, lets say like 'freedom' 'sadness' 'happyness' 'delightful' 'vengeful' etc as other beings. It's very weird. Maybe just imagination running amok. Ahh, imagination, can you imagine running into the full embodiment of imagination as a being? What kind of person or being would that be like... What about forgetfullness? WOW. I wonder if he knows who or what he is... Seriously a very interesting way to look at things.

An interesting idea would be to see a movie embodied by ideas as entities in there own right. Maybe the ideas would be gods. Who by there grace lend us there gifts to live and experience and learn and grow.

Dangerously abstract and vague but if life is anything, it is that.

It seems to me that there’s an adventure in finding our talents and in discovering our gifts.

You might be right.

 

[Buddy]

[quote author=luke]
I can't be me. I can't actualise one element of me. There is always conflict between the different elements. The ego doesnt have full spectrum control, neither does the essence or soul.[/quote]

Maybe this will offer food for thought: According to Dr. Robert Ornsteen (Roots of the Self), there is an approach/withdrawal continuum that may provide one possible answer to help explain these two types of "currents" that tend to cancel each other out.

This continuum is a function of whether a person is primarily dominated by their left or right brain hemisphere.

When a person is a born or conditioned to be a left-hemisphere approacher, they tend to act in an external and expressive way. They’ll lurch toward things they want, move from thing to thing, person to person, and have a life filled with wild variety and activity.

A right-hemisphere avoider, however, will behave differently. Although they have the same internal "need for aliveness," they’re prevented by their right hemisphere from expressing their impulsivity in the external world and in an external fashion. As a result, instead of interrupting others they interrupt themselves. Their daydreams and unwanted thoughts constantly interrupt their own stream of attention.

Also, scientists hypothesize a genetic/evolutionary basis for at least a part of this. Anthropologists and social scientists point out the stereotype of males as outer-directed "doers". According to our most primal cultural stories, men should be out in the world conquering, changing, and transforming things; being outgoing, expressive, aggressive, and impulsive to an 'acceptable' extent.

From this perspective, you might understand what you're experiencing and might intuitively feel to be true: approaching and withdrawing behaviors are, or can be, simply two faces of one and the same thing: an unmet need for aliveness.

These conflicts can easily have their beginnings in early childhood by being conditioned to 'stop' or 'withdraw' every time you try to approach something or someone, verbally or physically. And this training can go on for years and create 'grooves' or habits that can become hard to break out of.

This kind of conditioning can also effect other contexts of life - like romantic relationships, creative aspirations or anything where one's emotional sensitivity is involved, since a 'fear of something bad happening' might be close by, OSIT.

There is an aspect that I suppose does get affected by how it is perceived by others. It wants praise, it takes other peoples impression to heart. I suppose it is the 'ego' element.

There is another side that just wants to 'be.' It looks at something and see's a possibility, an exciting possibilty and it wants to reach that possibility. It wants to get there and touch it, experience it, express it, see the world through it etc.

However, between the 2 different sides, there is a relationship, maybe the 3rd force according to mouravieff that determines what is.

I dont understand how the dynamics work but I know in the end, the result, atleast for me is frustration. Where neither side actually achieves its goal. The 1st element doesnt get its praise and the 2nd element doesnt get to experience its dream.

Sounds like the same 'missing middle' area of inhibition that was discussed in another of your threads. Maybe there are one or more constants (or common denominators) you could look for?

 

[luke wilson]

I dont want to start a new thread so I decided to ask this question here...

My question.

I was trying to understand a thread that I read, which I must admit was abit cleverly written that it made it hard for a 'simple' minded individual like myself to understand. I suppose written for a certain breed of person. Uhmm, anyways, you know how sometimes or always you cannot like change 'how you are.'
What is conscious work?

I understood conscious work as being able of breaking a rule, one rule in particular, that is how one is. That essentially, to my understanding would mean one isnt a machine anymore because a machine by definition cannot not do what it was designed to do and start doing something else, like in a radical way. A computer cannot be a car through its own effort, a computer designed to take measurements of wind speed cannot just start taking measurements of voice pitch. Random I know but that is what I understood conscious work to be. Not to be restrained by rules but rather to have the ability to break through boundaries or sets of rules thus breaking that barrier of being a machine and I suppose entering into the domain of true creativity...

Is conscious work, interms of the 4th way just simply being aware of ones actions and the reasons underlying that action? Like motivations etc etc. Like in this example, I suppose a computer is not aware why it is doing something, it just does stuff because that is how it was programmed but I suppose if it gained an awareness of what it was doing and continued doing it in awareness, I suppose, perfecting the programming and finding quicker more efficient ways of performing the task it was designed to do thanks to this awareness and self-knowledge would that be, conscious work? I mean, as far as I am aware, the computer has only 2 options, to either to do what it was designed to do be it do it better or worse or simply not to do anything. It doesnt have the 3rd option of breaking the rule of not being a computer anymore...

So, just looking for clarification as to exactly what is meant by conscious work, esoterically speaking. Am I over-complicating things? I feel like I am but nonetheless I dont know what it means not to be a machine. Like definition wise, I understand to not be a machine, one must be able to do 'conscious work' but I dont know what 'conscious work' or 'consciously thinking' is. That is why I am asking for clarification interms of how other people understand the term 'conscious.' Esoterically speaking.

 

[Buddy]

luke, if that Oracle-Neo thing is bothering you, then let me clarify. That lesson didn't mean that Neo would never be anything other than mechanical. His choices weren't either/or options.

The lesson was that there are no shortcuts to knowledge. You have to go through the Work, or anything else, step-by step. If you do so, then at any given moment, your doing what is in you to do will be the sequential steps up the staircase, so-to-speak.

The rest of the movie bears out this explanation.

Now, about the 'conscious work' thing? What do you want to be conscious of? As one possibility, you can become conscious of your real desires or whatever just by opening your 'assumption closet' and taking inventory.
Self-observe. Learn about what you assume to be true and what you believe as you infer it all by how you act in many different contexts, and keep learning.

That would be a good start, OSIT.

 

[obyvatel]

So, just looking for clarification as to exactly what is meant by conscious work, esoterically speaking. Am I over-complicating things? I feel like I am but nonetheless I dont know what it means not to be a machine. Like definition wise, I understand to not be a machine, one must be able to do 'conscious work' but I dont know what 'conscious work' or 'consciously thinking' is. That is why I am asking for clarification interms of how other people understand the term 'conscious.' Esoterically speaking.

Esoterically speaking, being conscious is related to self remembering . When a machine is able to remember that it is a machine in the present time, it starts becoming conscious. This state of self-remembering requires knowledge of its "machine-ness" which is obtained through the sustained practice of self-observation.
Conscious work can begin when one is able to stay conscious for long periods of time - in other words when one is awake more than when one is asleep, he can choose to do conscious work in his waking state.
That is my current understanding.

 

[HowToBe]

Out of curiosity, luke, I'm wondering what numerology turns out for your "Life Path Number". If you wish, you can test it easily here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=17927.0 By your self-description, I'm guessing you turn out as a 2 or 5, most likely 2. I turned out as a 5, and the overall description seemed accurate, and others in that thread said theirs were pretty accurate as well.

Anyway, regarding your questions about "worthiness": Who or what decides that you are worthy or unworthy? Over and over in stories, the true heroes were often the ones who started out feeling or seeming unworthy. Did they become heroes because they were worthy, or were they worthy because they became heroes, or or was there a third force involved? Perhaps they were worthy precisely because they did not fit any preconceived image or "heroism" or "talent", or rather because they had something within them that, when actualized, transformed them into the hero? Just food for thought, as I'm stepping a bit beyond my confidence here.

I think this might be an important question in this situation: Does a warrior need to be worthy to recognize and accept a challenge; that is, to overcome an obstacle (ie learn a lesson)? It seems to me that in this case the internal questioning of worthiness is an obstacle in its own right which prevents the potential warrior from challenging him/herself in other ways.

To put worthiness in other terms, to be worthy means to "deserve" something; if one is unworthy, they "do not deserve". So why do you think you "don't deserve" to do enjoyable things? Doesn't this imply that you feel you "deserve" to suffer? The question returns; What authority decides what you deserve? Other people? Your inner predator? Is there a "worthiness chart" where we can look up what we are objectively worthy/unworthy of?

Attempting to speak objectively; Won't the Divine Cosmic Mind make sure that you experience exactly that which you "deserve" according to what you see and what you do? Therefore, why take on the burden of determining your own "worthiness"? Isn't that a form of anticipation/assumption?

I may be way off, but these are what "I" thought after reading this thread. For what it's worth...

 

[luke wilson]

Hi HowToBe,

Thanks for the link. Interesting site. Can not believe I never knew about it, wonders of networking.

According to it, my life path is 6.

This is how it starts

You possess great compassion and seek to be of service to others. You have concern for the weak and the downtrodden.

OMG OMG! 4D STO HERE I COME!!! :D

Hahaha just kidding, nice site.

Hey, uhhm, I think you are right with your whole evaluation of worthiness vs unworthiness. I think what I am dealing with is a 'program' or 'spirit of trauma.'

Isn't that a form of anticipation/assumption?

Agreed. Hard to not assume and anticipate especially under certain conditions.

 

[HowToBe]

Isn't that a form of anticipation/assumption?

Agreed. Hard to not assume and anticipate especially under certain conditions.

Isn't that the truth!?

I'm glad to have helped.