Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

[CarpeDiem]

Nothing is as it seems.
Acquiring false knowledge is worse than not acquiring knowledge at all.
False knowledge in the Work may be deadly
But what to do if reading Gurdjieff / Mouravieff is not enough in practical terms? Whom to trust in Work?

OK means zero killed. After taking a cold shower, I decided to write this, starting new topic despite of Laura’s advice to keep all working material in one place as this post is definitely not in frame of M’adventures thread. What follows below is not roses, so mods are free to delete everything. But I have to write this anyway.
When I read Azur’s post with advice to SAO to do stalking

But I have a question for you SAO: why were you frustrated and sick by this exchange? Was there something bothering you that needed to be resolved? The resolution of the "thing" has indicators that need to be stalked. Has something tickled your emotional center?
It seems that this minor drama has or could be rather a good thing all in all. If everyone could recall their impressions at every instance (as the posts rolled in and changed aspects), it could be beneficial to see how perception (possibly constraining the full set of possibilities) and programs work hand in hand, on an individual basis.
And it bears examining WHY so many people willingly "paid" energy in seeing where this would go. What was at stake? The initial setup certainly held a well crafted hook, i.e. the "carrot".
What was gained, and what was lost by this series of posts, and by whom? (And here I mean those directly involved and more importantly, the OTHERS, as observers).

I understood it one-way: senior member (like QFG) is giving a generous advice in Work to listen to and follow.
What happened next, Azur’s reply to SAO seemed to me a complete appeasement and in direct emotional contradiction to his/her previous post and logically (to me) I had a gut feeling that his/her previous post / advice in Work should be disregarded (if I will ever find myself in the same/similar situation as SAO I would not follow that advice).
My problem is I don’t know how is possible to critically examine advices in Work given on forum and casschat. In the middle of M’adventures thread I started to realize (may be wrongly) that I couldn’t trust advices and suggestions regarding the Work of members joined in January 2006 and that a long presence on casschat and/or forum doesn’t imply I should blindly follow anything regarding Work coming from senior members. I thought that QFS is a secret laboratory where advanced in esoteric persons who divided essence from personality in themselves and crossed the first threshold are mutually helping each other to advance.

Then, PFR in the middle of M-adventures thread wrote:

My, Nina ?? A member of QFS, to boot.

And later Laura writes

It is clear that knowledge and understanding of others as well as control over the self is completely lacking in Nina and Nima. What makes this incident inexcusable is that these very things were pointed out to Nina and Nima in the past - they were warned. What is more, it was in the context of a different, but similar, situation where an individual with obvious psychological issues was being used by them for their own gain.

If at least one member of qfs is being ponerised, what the hell is going on – in sense whom should i trust - as I was very carefully reading all posts and trusting advices especially if they regarded the Work, of senior members (all those who joined in January 2006).
AdPop joined in March 2006. But then, he/she wrote
on this thread

When I reviewed this for the QFG in 2003, the question of plagiarism came up

This statement had been not rebutted by anyone, so I concluded for myself, if one day AdPop will give me an advice in Work, I will trust him/her.

Then, there is Frai Jonah, QFS member, who is he/she on forum/ casschat? Can I trust him/her in Work?
There is K.A.H., QFS member, who is he/she on forum/ casschat? Can I trust his/her advices in Work?
Should I trust Richard (person in casschat) advices in Work (not given to me) but I read them carefully.
Should I trust gaelen’s advices in Work? (person on forum)?
Should I trust Craig’s advices in Work?

Then somewhere on forum (I can’t find now where exactly) one forum member, joined like on 1-18-2006 wrote about avatars, that there is a ‘nice selection V for Vendetta avatars for QFS’.
Harrison has V for Vendetta avatar, and his mail is red pill one, so I assume, if he ever will give me advice in Work, I should follow it.
Except Anart and SAO, Iconoclast and Masked Avatar have these V for Vendetta avatars. Should I trust Iconoclast and Masked Avatar advices in Work if they ever will give me one?

For a long time I was mulling writing a post to Work section to ask for advice, but every time after reflection backed off because it was clear that I didn’t use all my internal forces to do everything I can do on my own first. After M’adventures thread I made a staggering for myself conclusion that everything is not as it seems and I should not trust anybody just because they have V avatars or joined on 17-01-2006 or write impressive posts on stalking (in Azur’s case with SAO).
But how to do anything at all in Work without asking an advice from anybody who already lived through that experience?
Now I can’t ask anything regarding the Work as I don’t trust any longer anyone except mods and admins. I would like to trust SAO too. I have an idea whois Atreides, but can i trust his advices regarding the Work if i will ask for one, and he would offer one?
To put it in clear-cut form: if will I ever find a courage to write anything regarding the Work and ask for advice regarding the Work and others will offer their help; I will follow advices of mods and admins on this forum. No matter how literally elaborate and impressive would be advices in the Work from others, I will disregard all of them altogether. Acquiring false knowledge is worse than not acquiring knowledge at all. And mistake in the Work might be deadly.
Mods, you are free to delete the topic now due to its abusive content, but that’s exactly what I think. I apologize to everyone but I won’t make a mistake

 

[Nević Nenad]

CarpeDiem, when I read C’s transcripts, some of Wave and Laura’s writings on this forum, I imagined her like some big, hard stubborn woman with strong commanding voice, to be honest I imagined her looking like general, almost like a man, very Hollywood. Then I read transcription of hers recent interview to BBC and I was even more convinced in that picture especially after that phrase “Take it to the bank".
Then found link to listen that radio emission and heard her voice first time and I was surprised. That tiny, through the nose, almost childish voice (worse then my mother’s) was Laura? The Laura? C’s Laura? Then I thinked out why I had such an impression of her and learn much about myself. Now I find it still through the nose and childish, but calming and gentle, and what is more important I learned that’s not the messenger’s appearance (or voice in this case) counts but the message is. Hope Laura wouldn’t be angry for this.

I am trying to tell how I do it, read all, listen to all,( Vendeta sign or no) but think and ask about everything, get my own conclusions; but be prepared to even drop my own conclusions down. Maybe my post would be pale for you, maybe not.

 

[Rich]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

if will I ever find a courage to write anything regarding the Work and ask for advice regarding the Work and others will offer their help; I will follow advices of mods and admins on this forum. No matter how literally elaborate and impressive would be advices in the Work from others, I will disregard all of them altogether.

It is clear that this incident has deeply questioned who you trust. If you remember back to when you first joined the forum then I am sure you would have naturally given greater weighting to replies by mods and admins anyway. By self-limiting I don't see how discounting what less-experienced OTHERS say, is in your or the whole forums interest. Isn't the spirit of the forum one of teacher/student? You do have a great deal of experience to give those of us who are finding our feet and so your posts are insightful.

If anyone new posts something knowing that you will immediately discount it then that will naturally be reciprocated. So i don't see how it can create a healthy learning environment. I do see where you are coming from but wouldn't greater discernment be a more appropriate goal?

 

[Peto]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Hi CarpeDiem,

I understand how you feel. I'm also shocked and my confidence in the senior members shaken a bit after this event. So what to do about it? A standard reply would be to read everyone's advice, trust no one and use your own critical thinking, blah, blah,... A more elaborate one, and one that I use, is to have a system of weightings. I do give different weightings to posts/advices from other members based on their seniority and their track records. I also give a weighting to my own opinion. When I encounter something that requires judgement, the (subconscious) weighting above will give me one. Is it a perfect solution? Not really, but it generally helps, especially when I don't have enough knowledge to discern myself. As my knowledge grows, the weighting I give to my own assessment will increase.

This approach to other people's advices is very similar to the approach regarding knowledge/information that many "elders" on this forum advocates: Put knowledge/information in different categories with different levels of confidence. As new information comes in, update the confidence levels of all existing knowledge. Keep on doing it forever.

 

[Ryan]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

But what to do if reading Gurdjieff / Mouravieff is not enough in practical terms? Whom to trust in Work?

From ISOTM:

"In properly organized groups no faith is required; what is required is simply a little trust and even that only for a little while, for the sooner a man begins to verify all he hears the better it is for him."

"Do not think that we can begin straight away by forming a group. A group is a big thing. A group is begun for definite concerted work, for a definite aim. I should have to trust you in this work and you would have to trust me and one another. Then it would be a group. Until there is general work it will only be a preparatory group. We shall prepare ourselves so as in the course of time to become a group. And it is only possible to prepare ourselves to become a group by trying to imitate a group such as it ought to be, imitating it inwardly of course, not outwardly.

The point being, if you are not in a group, you should trust nobody unreservedly. And even in the group, you should have a LITTLE trust - not blind faith. But if one has not made the commitment to preparatory group Work, it is best not to trust ANYTHING that anyone says. Eventually one's own discernment may lead to a choice of which group is appropriate to learn from, but that is not guaranteed to be correct. I see this as why true esoteric Work respects free will - the intial decision of the student to trust the group/teacher must be made on their own.

My problem is I don’t know how is possible to critically examine advices in Work given on forum and casschat. In the middle of M’adventures thread I started to realize (may be wrongly) that I couldn’t trust advices and suggestions regarding the Work of members joined in January 2006 and that a long presence on casschat and/or forum doesn’t imply I should blindly follow anything regarding Work coming from senior members. I thought that QFS is a secret laboratory where advanced in esoteric persons who divided essence from personality in themselves and crossed the first threshold are mutually helping each other to advance.

There is nothing "secret" about what takes place in the QFS, except for sincere discussions of personal situations that are best not done in public. This is done to protect people's privacy, not to share "hidden" or "arcane" knowledge or such. What has been previously tucked away in true "esoteric schools" of the past is nothing more than a method of application of a true and objective psychology. The method has always been freely available - Laura and Ark have just put the pieces together and presented a "streamlined curriculum", so to speak. However, as one who seriously applies the method will discover for themselves, there is a big difference between theoretical knowledge and practical experience.

If at least one member of qfs is being ponerised, what the hell is going on – in sense whom should i trust - as I was very carefully reading all posts and trusting advices especially if they regarded the Work, of senior members (all those who joined in January 2006).

The QFS is still a preparatory group - not the working group. The sincerity of applicants is generally taken at face value, although one of the criteria for application is a period of interaction on Casschat or the SOTT forum so this can be verified in some ways. Still, the problem is (as G. and M. so clearly explicate) that people are insincere with themselves. They join the QFS for what they think is one reason, but there are actually other reasons driving them. The interesting thing about the proper application of the psychological method however, is that it tends to bring the real reasons to the surface - something which sometimes can be a nasty shock to the person themselves due to their inability to admit their own predatory natures to themselves. In the groups, no predators can hide indefinitely.

This statement had been not rebutted by anyone, so I concluded for myself, if one day AdPop will give me an advice in Work, I will trust him/her.

Perhaps you should examine AdPops words and actions - what he has produced - and decide whether the "fruits" of his actions make him seem trustworthy?

For a long time I was mulling writing a post to Work section to ask for advice, but every time after reflection backed off because it was clear that I didn’t use all my internal forces to do everything I can do on my own first. After M’adventures thread I made a staggering for myself conclusion that everything is not as it seems and I should not trust anybody just because they have V avatars or joined on 17-01-2006 or write impressive posts on stalking (in Azur’s case with SAO).

Exactly. Like Santa Claus, you seem to have been making a list of who is "naughty and nice", and deciding who to trust based on that list. Sorry, but it just ain't that simple. :)

To put it in clear-cut form: if will I ever find a courage to write anything regarding the Work and ask for advice regarding the Work and others will offer their help; I will follow advices of mods and admins on this forum. No matter how literally elaborate and impressive would be advices in the Work from others, I will disregard all of them altogether. Acquiring false knowledge is worse than not acquiring knowledge at all. And mistake in the Work might be deadly.

Well, that is a good rule of thumb, but you should always remember the third force - the specific situation. Mods are not infallible - we do make mistakes. And many forum members here have contributed many valuable observations and insights for the preparatory and working groups. It would be a good exercise for you to work out for yourself who is trustworthy and who is not. As Jiminy Cricket says, "Always let your Conscience be your guide!". ;)

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

I don’t know how is possible to critically examine advices in Work given on forum and casschat

Ok but what is your solution? To completely stop any critical examination of anything, period? To develop a black and white presumptuous perspective where what is true and what is false is decided ahead of time because you assume that a particular source is infallible and therefore anything that is not infallible must be completely disregarded? This is probably the one single biggest thing, the very first and most important thing, that the Work teaches - that this approach is categorically wrong, it has always been wrong, and it is the reason that humanity is asleep, why governments can get away with everything, why the whole STS hierarchy can get away with everything it gets away with.

Acquiring false knowledge is worse than not acquiring knowledge at all. And mistake in the Work might be deadly. I apologize to everyone but I won’t make a mistake

First, you have already made the biggest mistake you can possibly make by adopting this approach - and if you adopt it, it will absolutely guarantee that you will not find the truth and will be led astray. Second, you are not acquiring knowledge when you consider someone's advice. So your logic here is erroneous - you are not in any danger just by listening and thinking about something - only in danger if you blindly believe it - and blind faith is exactly what your approach entails.

Carpe, anybody can be wrong. Laura, Joe, Henry, Scott, Richard, Ark, any/all of QFS members, casschat members, members of this forum, and any other being in all of existance. It's just a fact of life - you cannot escape this by assuming (and yes, you are assuming in the fullest sense of this word) that a certain category of people cannot be wrong about certain things. You are drawing a line where no line exists - how do you decide who can be wrong and who cannot be wrong about whatever? How many years of "doing the Work" before you put that person over this imaginary line - 2? 4? 50?

The thing is, this is what is at the root of seeking truth - having no absolute certainty and resisting the urge to believe and assume (aka, adopt absolute certainty). This is why people adopt religions and infallible perfect "beings" that write books that provide all the answers. It liberates them from the uncomfortable state of uncertainty where you cannot take comfort in the absolute infallibility of your knowledge or some source.

Another problem with your approach - what happens when Laura or anyone else you decide to just trust says they were wrong about some part of the work? What happens when new data forces the group to adjust their approach and understanding, and what has been said previously was not accurate or only partially accurate? Are you going to stand there with your mouth open going "but.. but... but... I thought you couldn't be wrong? What am I supposed to believe now, what you said before, or what you're saying now?". And that's the issue - you cannot believe at any point, you absolutely have to remain critical and to always question every utterance from anybody, no matter who.

And as for not knowing how to critically examine this stuff - how does anybody critically examine anything? How does the SOTT team treat the material from the C's? How do they treat mainstream news? How do we treat one another here? What about your friends and family? What about strangers? Basically, use your own common sense, use your own best judgement based on all the data you have available. There is nothing you can do to absolutely guarantee that you will do the right thing. I'm sorry dude, but that's just how it is - nobody can guarantee this to you, we're all in the same boat - we're all doing our best and using our minds the best we can and doing what makes the most sense by thinking about it very carefully. And sometimes we change our mind, because at all times we must remain open to new data, we can always be wrong, and we have to accept this possibility and continue walking anyway.

Carpe, have some faith in yourself, dude seriously, seize the day. You are just as capable as Laura or anyone to see the truth, please do not deny this and pretend that this is not true because you have no reason to think this - there is no data that says you are any less capable to be just as objective and knowledgeable as anybody. All you have to do is have faith in yourself, have faith in your ability to learn and grow. Do not believe, do not assume, do not take anything on faith, tread slowly, and always think critically. Chances are, if you do this, you'll be alright. Seriously, carpe diem, I kid you not!

Then again you say you would like to trust me. But I am clueless. I know next to nothing. For all I know, everything I said above is wrong - and I'm prepared to change my mind if one day I discover that this is wrong. If I was a mod or a member of QFS I'd say the same thing, and I know each member would say this. In fact if you want them to ruin your self-assured delusion so you can snap out of this, I'm sure they'll have no problems saying this to you - that they can be wrong. The C's said it about themselves too, that they can be wrong, they don't know everything. RA said it. Anything or anyone in the universe that claims the opposite is a liar and a manipulator, only the universe itself knows everything, but it doesn't talk much so you can't really interrogate it or anything (well maybe in Abu Ghraib the universe will admit that it planned 911...).

Edit: I don't know what this means:

What happened next, Azur’s reply to SAO seemed to me a complete appeasement and in direct emotional contradiction to his/her previous post and logically (to me) I had a gut feeling that his/her previous post / advice in Work should be disregarded (if I will ever find myself in the same/similar situation as SAO I would not follow that advice).

Could you please provide more details about what you mean here? And just fyi, it's not about following advice as much as considering and thinking about what is said. Don't just blindly follow it.

Also just to comment on what Ryan said, obviously everyone is not gonna be "equal" in the sense that some people you will know will have a higher probability of saying something true because you know them, their approach, their understanding, their predisposition to reality itself and their methods. And the more you know about yourself and just the human "Being" in general the better. In fact, probably those you know to be most likely to say something true, for them you will have to think even more about what they are saying because you don't want to miss subtle profound insights that may lurk there either. So I guess the bottom line is, there is no free lunch, no shortcuts, critical thinking is inseparable from the Work, it is a requirement.

 

[Anders]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Thank you for starting this thread and voicing your trouble/discomfort with what could be called the fall out of the M'adventures. So much better to air it rather than closing down and going into hibernation, which happened to some after the Esoquest debacle. When that happens the forum suffers to some extent due to losing another pair of eyes and ears.

I concur with the eloquent responses given above as they reflect my approach to this issue. SAO put it well:

Then again you say you would like to trust me. But I am clueless. I know next to nothing. For all I know, everything I said above is wrong - and I'm prepared to change my mind if one day I discover that this is wrong. If I was a mod or a member of QFS I'd say the same thing, and I know each member would say this. In fact if you want them to ruin your self-assured delusion so you can snap out of this, I'm sure they'll have no problems saying this to you - that they can be wrong.

Anders

 

[Laura]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Laura's last post really opens my eyes about the severity of the situation.

You know, I wrote the post in an effort to be as sincere as possible and then I went down to have a little lunch. As I was eating I realized that by making an effort to NOT say certain things I had actually said too much. So, I deleted the post. You read it before I did, though, and perhaps that's why it was there that long.

Yes, indeed, the situation is more serious than anyone can even imagine or than we can even write about - ESPECIALLY on a public forum.

"Take that to the bank."

 

[Peto]

Yes, Laura. I understand why you deleted it. I also did the same as soon as I realized that.

 

[Miss Isness]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

This seems to be essentially a thread about trust. Something that's been on my mind a lot lately. What I've noticed is that when I fail to trust people who deserve it, I reject exactly what it is I'm looking for. When I trust people who don't deserve it, I open the door to exactly what I'm determined to avoid. So, how to tell the difference?

I would equate that little trust that is necessary for new relationships to develop, as giving someone the benefit of the doubt. Meaning that I know there's a chance that the person is misleading me, but I choose to act as if he/she isn't. As time goes on, I will be able to observe that person. By their fruits you shall know them, yes, but there's more to it than that. The idea is not to make a blanket assessment of a person. Of course, it's helpful to identify and understand a person's character strengths and weaknesses, and the general trend of their actions. In doing so, one can always weigh the potential gains against the risks, and decide on the basis that if things go well, both people benefit, if not, the person who gives trust pays the consequences.

It's even more useful imho, though, to respond to how things progress in time. Even someone who is generally trustworthy, can get off the path, backslide, have blindspots, etc. If instead of responding to people, we would respond to their actions at any given time, it's easier to keep things on track. If something is said or done that inspires trust/or a lack of trust then take a corresponding step forward, or back. I've noticed that often by taking that simple step back without despairing about it, the other person takes a very necessary step forward, and this naturally happens at a pace the other person is comfortable with. On the contrary, a step back sometimes gives me the time to investigate my lack of trust and discover that it's unfounded.

One thing I noticed while living in Hawaii is that the people who are in hurry always seem to get to their destination more slowly, and I think that applies here. No need to be in a hurry, just give people what they are 'asking for' through their actions, and learn to trust yourself.

 

[CarpeDiem]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

Thanks, everybody, to coming out and for help. Laura, i catched your post before you deleted it, i remember what it was about but didn't save. I had a quick look at everything written here and had to run to prepare for Easter (we cook with mom together). I have to reflect on everything written, the first beautiful thing which came as a result of this topic was i'm crying like a lonely wolf on the moon and i didn't do it for very long time. May be there is still some chance that some may rather have conscience then be prive from it...
I was and am very frustrated that nothing works in Work for me. Thanks, everybody! I'm too emotional now, need to calm down.

 

[Art]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

The problem is not the advices you might get or not. The problem is not Laura's voice either (that was childish). The problem is not even if someone lyes to you or not.
Is not Azure. PFR or AdPop.
The problem is what it has alwasy been and what it always will: One.
You.
Do you trust your self? Then you can trust anyone, anything.
If you do not trust your self, anything is a lye, including your "precautions" when it comes to decide wether to trust someone or not. If you dont trust your self, that person will deceive you: You can take that to the banck as well.
N/N-Marie is a crystaline example of what it is to suspect the other is ploting against you, but before that, it is an example of HOW one can plot against one's own self. The immediate result of that is fear. Marie was, I think, more isolated by her fear than the way she was treated. Knowledger of self, holding the same vibration, could not polarize but ponerize.
Shure, Knowledge of self and Marie are both innocents, to their eyes. They are both victims of eachother.
But before that, they are victims of their selfs. Victims of their aspirations.
Are we, as "impartial readers", in a better situation? This is a question worthy to ponder.
Worthy to ponder about one's own fears.
Can you trust anyone, anything? Depends of the knowledge of the self you posess. Self-trust is self-knowledge. And having that, you are way ahead of "the forces" since you become a force on your own.
The problem is definetelly out there, but it did not started ot there. It started within you.
Here, inside, is the origin of the world.
Ascention, awakening, spirituality, is precisely this problematic. And it is precisely this problematic the one that is being selled for cheap "out there". Certainly, because it is that "out there" what needs you to point your problems to a target other than your self. If you do that, you are rewarded.
If you dont, you suffer.
When are we going to start to pierce the veil that separates us from our own selfs? It will be THEN when "the work" will have a meaning. Meanwhile, one will be only reading "interesting stuff", issuing wise suggestions and deep judgments.
Only untill then one will be capable of stop being used.
One is the problem. Me. Each of us. To solve that is to fix the world.

 

[Laura]

Reflections on M’adventures – whoiswho - building a trust

CarpeDiem, when I read C’s transcripts, some of Wave and Laura’s writings on this forum, I imagined her like some big, hard stubborn woman with strong commanding voice, to be honest I imagined her looking like general, almost like a man, very Hollywood. Then I read transcription of hers recent interview to BBC and I was even more convinced in that picture especially after that phrase “Take it to the bank".
Then found link to listen that radio emission and heard her voice first time and I was surprised. That tiny, through the nose, almost childish voice (worse then my mother’s) was Laura? The Laura? C’s Laura? Then I thinked out why I had such an impression of her and learn much about myself. Now I find it still through the nose and childish, but calming and gentle, and what is more important I learned that’s not the messenger’s appearance (or voice in this case) counts but the message is. Hope Laura wouldn’t be angry for this.

I am trying to tell how I do it, read all, listen to all,( Vendeta sign or no) but think and ask about everything, get my own conclusions; but be prepared to even drop my own conclusions down. Maybe my post would be pale for you, maybe not.

This really made me chuckle!

I really hate the sound of my own voice on tape or radio. It is definitely NOT how I sound to myself inside my head!!!

BUT, having said that, let me add that everyone who knows me who listened to that interview wrote to me and said "My god! You sound like you are on death's door! What's wrong?!"

The fact is, I was very sick at the time I had to do the scheduled interview. I took a whole lot of different medications to keep me from coughing myself silly while trying to talk and to dry up my sinuses and so on, and boy, was I having a hard time talking at all! I had to approach each word with great care so that it would not trigger a bronchial spasm! So my vocal cords were "walking on eggshells" there, fer shure!

And that's not to say that I sound all that much better when I'm not sick.

 

[ark]

I was and am very frustrated that nothing works in Work for me.

If you just continue, persist and be patient, then one day something will work for you. But you will be so busy with things that you DO, that you will not even notice that something in you has changed. This realization will come much later, and will not be considered as anything of importance. Because OTHER things will be important.

 

[Anders]

I was and am very frustrated that nothing works in Work for me.

If you just continue, persist and be patient, then one day something will work for you. But you will be so busy with things that you DO, that you will not even notice that something in you has changed. This realization will come much later, and will not be considered as anything of importance. Because OTHER things will be important.

That was impeccably well said, Ark!!!!!!