Ice Age Preparation ?

[Neil]

Are you serious? I made it up? READ THE POST.

Joe brought this up to explain why Laura wrote the many great works she did. I feel she did them for a purpose, even if they were not probable. Every living being DOES for a result. But Joe tried to make it seem like anyone who expects must be selfish etc. No, It's human as much as Caesar did what he did to make things better.

This STO worship is the problem.... it brings about a religiosity to things that is neither rational nor realistic.

I think you should reread this session and consider this quote.

Q: (TK) So, what I said was the gist of what is going on here. So, we have to figure out what we are supposed to do so that the earth can be maintained...
A: You will do what you will do.
Q: (TK) This is true.
A: Do you, in general, control 2nd density beings on earth?
Q: (L) Yes.
A: So, what is "fair" about that?
Q: (L) Nothing.
A: Okay, so what is the difference?!?!???
Q: (TK) So, basically, we control 2nd density, and 4th density controls us. There are the good guys and bad guys. (L) And we will do what we will do. Either we choose to align ourselves with the good guys, or with the bad guys.
A: It's up to you.
Q: (TK) However, if too many people align themselves with the bad guys, then the balance tips in their favor, and there is no more advancement, so there has to be education so that people will know...
A: T***, you are close, but you are missing the point.
Q: (L) What is the point?
A: The point is, there "has to be" nothing. You will do what you will do. You choose. We have told you this repeatedly, but you still suffer from self-centered perspective.
Q: (TK) Everybody is worried about themselves. They all want to be saved and not worry about others.
A: More to the point, everybody in an STS realm views themselves as somehow "special, chosen, or protected." This is simply not so!!
Q: (TK) What is going to happen, is going to happen. The people...
A: The body does not matter. It is the soul that either progresses or digresses, just ask S****!
Q: (L) Did S***** progress or digress?
A: Open.
Q: (L) So, in other words, we could just sit around and live our lives and have a good time and not worry about a damn thing. Is that the point?
A: No.
Q: (L) It's our choices?
A: Yes.

You will do what you will do. I've given up on trying to do a whole a bunch of things to save the world or make it better for other people because I think that the planet is so far gone that nothing I do or say really matters. However, I still read certain books that I find interesting, write these messages, and try to maintain a certain standard of decency because it is in me to do those things. I do it because it is what I am. I don't think you can try to be STO, that is STS thinking. You can learn about it and play around with it for awhile, and it becomes what you are, part of your existential fiber...or not. Similarly, the drowning child scenario may be instinct or it may not be, it's not necessarily either/or either. My understanding is that if you selflessly sacrifice yourself for others, because it's just a function of what you are, even if it is not entirely conscious, then that is an STO trait at some level. I really don't think STO deals with the calculated risk assessment at all. Self-sacrifice is simply what they are, and all other STO beings would understand that, even if it causes them to suffer in the short term, it is all part and parcel to helping others. For your counterexample, if an STO being were to take an action that were to cause others to suffer "needlessly" and we can debate about the meaning of that term, then yes we could say that action was aligned with STS and would probably cause a loss of polarity.

 

[Divide by Zero]

My point is that Laura wrote what she wrote because she likes to study history and it MIGHT change things. That is DOing in 3d. Joe is the one that turned it into this holy self sacrificing thing without any thought of reward. Still... saving the kid is a reward...

My problem with the STO ideal is that it sounds very much like the same logic that justifies gurus and saints etc who we later find out only did it because they were severely obsessed. An honest goal of helping change things, even if a fraction of the population is something I respect. If Laura wrote those books just cause of some ideal without a want to improve the world, maybe I would have not trusted them.
That is why this whole thing about instinct and so on does not make a proper argument. Of course it is important to look out for your survival and those you care about. To be STO here and jump in the river even if it means likely failure is NOT heroic, nor serving. Everything in 3d is relative to what we can DO. That is based on physics.... the same laws of cause and effect.

It doesn't negate the good things that the Wave, etc have done. But why this fake holiness of STO doing because of no reward? If you didn't expect to help society, writing those books would be like those savant mathematicians who spend years doing formulas for things that don't come up with a conclusion.

I think applying the idea of STO here is a bastardization of what it is to live in 3d.... of course we do things to get something. It's not evil to hope for the better. It's more deluded to be the savant that DOES a lot for no purpose.

 

[genero81]

I've given up on trying to do a whole a bunch of things to save the world or make it better for other people because I think that the planet is so far gone that nothing I do or say really matters. However, I still read certain books that I find interesting, write these messages, and try to maintain a certain standard of decency because it is in me to do those things. I do it because it is what I am. I don't think you can try to be STO, that is STS thinking. You can learn about it and play around with it for awhile, and it becomes what you are, part of your existential fiber...or not.

Yes and speaking for myself, I don't want to be the person who lowers my standards down to the lowest common denominator because 'it's all useless and nothing matters and nothing we do will make any difference so I may as well throw all decency out the window.' Or whatever reasoning one might come up with to justify further descent into a fearful and self centered callousness. Maybe this scenario where all seems completely hopeless and pointless is exactly the conditions needed to make an unweighted choice for STO. And maybe that is the only way an STS entity can make an STO choice in an STS environment.

 

[Jones]

Things that are practiced and experienced can be handed over to instinct. We're not born with the instinctive ability to slam our foot on the brake of a moving car when someone walks out in front of it. But we learn to hand that action over to instinct through practicing and experiencing driving a car. If someone chooses to practice altruism and concern for the safety and the well being of others, then jumping in the water can be an instinctive action - but that doesn't necessarily make it a bad one nor presume any thing negative about the person who jumps in. The mention of the low path in The Wave, I believe, is for awareness sake that there's the possibility that there are a whole bunch of things we do automatically/robotically that may not be to the best benefit of others or ourselves or our goals and aims. If, in the example of jumping in to rescue someone, an individual always jumped in to rescue someone in water, that would be an example of the low path running amok - the person in the water may just be having a bath and THAT action could be STS because the person in the bath isn't asking to be rescued.

DBZ:

This STO worship is the problem.... it brings about a religiosity to things that is neither rational nor realistic.

I did go looking for the C's session that talked about STO/STS and graduation to 4D, but I couldn't find it - maybe my memory is playing tricks on me with this. I recall it being said that in order to graduate to 4D one either had to be at least 55% STO, or 95% STS. At the moment, we're candidates at best who are working towards that 55%. That means that everyone who is still in this 3D is at least 45% STS, that kind of refutes the religiosity argument in favour of an acceptance that none that are still here in 3D either are or can be totally STO, and we are at least almost half STS while we are here. If I am remembering those percentage correctly, then it makes sense that a certain amount of STS has to be preserved in this dimension - survival of SELF and SPECIES, taking care of self comes first because you're no good to anyone else for any stretch of time if you don't - the limitations of living in a meat suit.

I still don't think it's about changing the world - isn't that the kind of "Staring down the Universe" action that can't be won? It's kind of like one group choosing how the world should change and trying to enforce that on the rest of the people in the world. It's more about finding those who see things for what they are, are totally dissatisfied with the mess and want to aim for something different for themselves and those others who see the same things and choose the same things. Hence 3D goes on as it always is and does, some graduate to 4D in either an STO or STS capacity. The 3D world returns to the Golden Age in it's own time according to it's own cycles or not.

 

[Ursus Minor]

Yes and speaking for myself, I don't want to be the person who lowers my standards down to the lowest common denominator because 'it's all useless and nothing matters and nothing we do will make any difference so I may as well throw all decency out the window.' Or whatever reasoning one might come up with to justify further descent into a fearful and self centered callousness.

Fine piece of virtue signaling...

 

[Zar]

Oh wow, I was the one who had a brain fart. My bad DBZ, I've just recovered from a nasty bug and my system is still messed up(aside from the regular stuff). I was thinking that jumping in to save someone isn't necessarily instinctual but completely missed the words written down.

 

[genero81]

Fine piece of virtue signaling...

Fine piece of an unnecessary insult.

 

[Neil]

I think Laura started out trying to change the world, but later realized it wasn't going to work, at least not in the way that she envisioned. I still kind of hope that what I do will make a difference, but it's no longer a motivational factor. I don't know if it was a culmination of things I had read bubbling to the surface or what, but the question that the universe or my higher self posed to me when I was in a suicidal depression about all of this was, "When you strip away all of the factors, all of your reasons, what remains? Are you light or are you darkness?" Somewhat anticlimactically, I didn't really have an answer. It did start to change my relationship with reality, over a period of years, probably still ongoing. It probably sounds a little clichéd, but it's not an understanding that can be conveyed intellectually through writing. From an outsider's perspective, I probably just looked like some kid who had issues, but on the inside it was rather profound.

 

[genero81]

Fine piece of virtue signaling...

Honestly it had nothing to do with that at all. I was trying to convey that one could be motivated by not wanting to be a certain way as much as wanting to be virtuous or STO.

 

[Laura]

I think Laura started out trying to change the world, but later realized it wasn't going to work, at least not in the way that she envisioned. I still kind of hope that what I do will make a difference, but it's no longer a motivational factor. I don't know if it was a culmination of things I had read bubbling to the surface or what, but the question that the universe or my higher self posed to me when I was in a suicidal depression about all of this was, "When you strip away all of the factors, all of your reasons, what remains? Are you light or are you darkness?" Somewhat anticlimactically, I didn't really have an answer. It did start to change my relationship with reality, over a period of years, probably still ongoing. It probably sounds a little clichéd, but it's not an understanding that can be conveyed intellectually through writing. From an outsider's perspective, I probably just looked like some kid who had issues, but on the inside it was rather profound.

Yes, I did begin with the rather naive idea that if people just had a decent, reasoned argument presented to them, the lightbulb would go on, and they would see and change. That's why The Wave is so long and has so much material brought in to help with the arguments. And I guess it DOES work for some people, but a lot fewer than I had hoped for.

After awhile, when I realized that there were more people who were not capable of receiving well researched and presented information, I wanted to understand why and present that information to those who were capable of understanding it. So, I did that.

Behind it all is my own, personal drive to understand life and reality simply because it deserves to be studied and understood; I guess you can describe that as Love for all that exists. That persists in spite of the repeated disappointments, disillusionments, betrayals, etc. I guess that everything that is presented to me is something I want to know about and understand as best I can.

I guess that in my inner heart I still hope that the efforts will make a difference in some way, at some level of reality; if nothing else, that the Universe won't end without somebody caring enough to know and understand it. I'm just an ordinary, flawed human, but there's that "caring" thing inside me that won't let me go; it's bigger than I am.

 

[whitecoast]

My problem with the STO ideal is that it sounds very much like the same logic that justifies gurus and saints etc who we later find out only did it because they were severely obsessed. An honest goal of helping change things, even if a fraction of the population is something I respect. If Laura wrote those books just cause of some ideal without a want to improve the world, maybe I would have not trusted them.
That is why this whole thing about instinct and so on does not make a proper argument. Of course it is important to look out for your survival and those you care about. To be STO here and jump in the river even if it means likely failure is NOT heroic, nor serving. Everything in 3d is relative to what we can DO. That is based on physics.... the same laws of cause and effect.

I think Joe's point (maybe I'm wrong) was that there is in people who want to do good a kernal of potential for being STO... that there's a general source of caring and good will toward others that we can cultivate to be of objectively greater service. That doesn't mean it manifests automatically in a mature fashion, or in a way that's directed toward the most objectively beneficial goals. Someone stupidly throwing themselves into dangerous rapids to save a drowning person would be a negative example of that immature response. I guess all the crazy SJW and manufactured outrage in the media these days is an example of a perversion or cynical exploitation of that instinct in people. I remember in a Truth Perspective episode on personality that being agreeable, compassionate, and polite aren't virtuous if they are simply automatic reflexes. I remember even in a C session (can't find it atm) that wanderers from STO worlds have an "innate bias" toward the good, although it's not built on actual comprehension and understanding due to just being born.

I hope some of this speaks to your own struggle with some of the ideas.

But why this fake holiness of STO doing because of no reward?

I think there's two answers. The first is more theoretical and the second more practical. The theoretical answer is that a desire to obtain something for the self is STS because it constrains of the flow of energy (is a narcissistic mother who forces her children to study until their eyes strain being altruistic?)

I think the second answer is because it fundamentally makes it easier on us, ourselves, in a virtuously selfish fashion. If we did get personally identified and attached and invested in some creative and altruistic endeavor, and it under-performs in some way, we don't need to tear our hair out and think the worst of ourselves for it. Maybe it would force us to think about helping others more, similar to how all conditioning based on negative emotions works. But my experience tells me that it just creates more suffering for yourself.

The ironic thing too is that I really believe, as an admirer of Nassim Taleb, that we are much dumber without skin or soul in the game. We do *need* to care and hurt for another, and somehow allow ourselves to use that to fuel our actions. We're not souless robots. Maybe this is where many of the work concept of having "an observer" inside of us comes from. I am reminded of a maxim of Gurdjieff's father, quoted in Meetings with Remarkable Men :

(3)...be outwardly courteous to all without distinction, whether they be rich or poor, friends or enemies, power-possessors or slaves, and to whatever religion they may belong, but inwardly to remain free and never to put much trust in anyone or anything....
(4) love work for work's sake and not for its gain.

(4) seems to be an example of the manifestation of (3), OSIT. Here I feel like Gurdjieff is trying to demonstrate what I've been trying to explain. I hope it's helpful in some way. In your words I am seeing a struggle in your words on here, and I hope maybe some of what I share can become your own understanding, either to accept or reject (and we'll cross that bridge when we reach it).

I think applying the idea of STO here is a bastardization of what it is to live in 3d.... of course we do things to get something. It's not evil to hope for the better.

Of course it isn't. But maybe you've heard Buddhism's Second Noble Truth: suffering comes from attachment to things which do not last (fyi in the 1st draft of this I said "thinks which do not last", whatever that implies). I see non-attachment as a way to spare ourselves a little bit of unnecessary suffering, so long as we keep doing our best to act outwardly in the most beneficial fashion (although, as I have admitted, you kind of need and rely on those foundations to identify and appreciate the good). FWIW.

 

[Woodsman]

Holy smokes!

It all matters!

It’s easy for us to forget that we are of the world, so if we change ourselves, we change the part of the world we’re responsible for. -And there’s that undeniable ripple, anchoring effect.

Reading through Neil’s selection from the Ra Materials a few posts back, I found myself intrigued by the passages which describe an endless conflict between STS and STO, where neither can seem to win, and both sides find themselves drained from the conflict, -and unable to reach a perfected version of themselves due to the actions/intentions required to prevent subsumption by the other side. -To be wholly STO, one must include actions such as becoming a slave to that energy which wishes to crush others under the boot heel, except that conflicts with the requirement to exist freely in order to serve properly. So there’s pushback, and you get this whole cyclone of intentions. -Which is such a powerful battle that its question resonates through all layers of reality, defining much of our daily lives here in 3D, -and certainly most of our dream-expression, (fiction) media.

It’s not like the battle can be won, but I’m not sure it’s supposed to be. I can’t envision reality not having hot/cold, up/down, right/wrong. It makes life really interesting, and perhaps even drives the whole engine of the Cosmic School. What would be learned if everybody were dreamily going about their days in a state of blissful equilibrium like a bunch of heavenly hippies?

I LOVE the work done by this site, and by people like Laura and so many others now. Seeing people learning philosophy and studying How To Think and See at such complex levels today on YouTube and other areas of the internet, the “Intellectual Dark Web” where it has not yet been realized that such behavior is the New Cool, (hopefully that self-awareness won’t set in for a while yet. It’s so pure and fun right now without the sheep factor jumping aboard with an adornment virtue-signaled version to get in with the hip kids).., well, it’s amazing to see and it fills my being with satisfaction and joy. Nobody’s perfect, but the fact that people are genuinely TRYING to be Good Guys is just so.., awesome! It makes me really happy and energized and proud to be part of the whole Life on Earth thing.

 

[Ursus Minor]

Honestly it had nothing to do with that at all. I was trying to convey that one could be motivated by not wanting to be a certain way as much as wanting to be virtuous or STO.

genero81, I'm sorry for having made this statement calling your post "virtue signaling"...

It was way past bed time and I felt that you were insinuating that certain people, such as myself, were "fearful and callous"...

Having reread your post two or three times, I can say that it seems to have a completely different meaning now.

 

[yumi]

Things that are practiced and experienced can be handed over to instinct. We're not born with the instinctive ability to slam our foot on the brake of a moving car when someone walks out in front of it. But we learn to hand that action over to instinct through practicing and experiencing driving a car. If someone chooses to practice altruism and concern for the safety and the well being of others, then jumping in the water can be an instinctive action - but that doesn't necessarily make it a bad one nor presume any thing negative about the person who jumps in. The mention of the low path in The Wave, I believe, is for awareness sake that there's the possibility that there are a whole bunch of things we do automatically/robotically that may not be to the best benefit of others or ourselves or our goals and aims. If, in the example of jumping in to rescue someone, an individual always jumped in to rescue someone in water, that would be an example of the low path running amok - the person in the water may just be having a bath and THAT action could be STS because the person in the bath isn't asking to be rescued.

DBZ:


I did go looking for the C's session that talked about STO/STS and graduation to 4D, but I couldn't find it - maybe my memory is playing tricks on me with this. I recall it being said that in order to graduate to 4D one either had to be at least 55% STO, or 95% STS. At the moment, we're candidates at best who are working towards that 55%. That means that everyone who is still in this 3D is at least 45% STS, that kind of refutes the religiosity argument in favour of an acceptance that none that are still here in 3D either are or can be totally STO, and we are at least almost half STS while we are here. If I am remembering those percentage correctly, then it makes sense that a certain amount of STS has to be preserved in this dimension - survival of SELF and SPECIES, taking care of self comes first because you're no good to anyone else for any stretch of time if you don't - the limitations of living in a meat suit.

I still don't think it's about changing the world - isn't that the kind of "Staring down the Universe" action that can't be won? It's kind of like one group choosing how the world should change and trying to enforce that on the rest of the people in the world. It's more about finding those who see things for what they are, are totally dissatisfied with the mess and want to aim for something different for themselves and those others who see the same things and choose the same things. Hence 3D goes on as it always is and does, some graduate to 4D in either an STO or STS capacity. The 3D world returns to the Golden Age in it's own time according to it's own cycles or not.

if we consider that STS is inseparably linked to STO, and in the sense that STO is the compensatory response to the STS impulse.
if we consider that STA is an open network, 55% STO represents more of a partitioned amount of knowledge, the most important thing being to maintain the link, in this case.

came to me a little musical phrase...
"...necessarily, it oscillates to keep the balance, the pulse crosses to go in return this perfect image that is close to our hearts"

 

[3DStudent]

Maybe this scenario where all seems completely hopeless and pointless is exactly the conditions needed to make an unweighted choice for STO. And maybe that is the only way an STS entity can make an STO choice in an STS environment.

Or to put it another way, "If you won't choose the STO polarity in the worst of times, then you surely won't choose it in the best of times." The friction provides the fuel to make the choice. I recall a session where Ark said something like the little devil will become a big devil and you will know which way to choose.

It’s not like the battle can be won, but I’m not sure it’s supposed to be.

Yeah, the battle is always there and you can 'go home' (towards STO polarity) anytime. So if the battle is going on, make sure you bring your sword! And like JBP says, know how and when to use it and when to keep it sheathed.

This thread has taken a much more comprehensive look at all of this and I'm grateful for that. It has become a rich discussion.