The Wonder of Thinking

[SoCurious]

We talk about being constantly asleep, but do we all understand exactly what is being said?

Colin Wilson wrote about peak experiences where for a short while, a moment in the day, waking up at dawn, the light is brighter, colours are more vivid, we have a sense of peace, and seem to able to intuit unlimited knowledge. Factor X (Wilson's term) seems to be that something special that allows certain gifted people the ability to have peak experiences. It is the reason some people stand outside the domain of the mundane. The reason they "don't fit" and the primary cause of extreme anti-social or super-social behaviour. They don't fit because they intuitively know something is wrong - factor X is at work. And I think it can be developed.

As slow as I am to "click" most of the time, realization comes late, and in this case I have just realized that although I did not have any peak experience, I did in fact "wake up", and what's more, I can see how simple it could be to fall asleep again.

Now when I say I'm slow I hate to admit that this all occured last year! Duh!

I believe I've found a way to wake up that can be utilized by anyone who is not afraid to put their brains to good use.

Q: (H) What percentage of the US population actually thinks at all?

A: 12% if you define it rigidly.

Yip. The process is thought. Heavy duty thinking.

In 2010 I joined the Google Group, Public Banking (started by Ellen Brown after publication of her book "Web of Debt"), as I wanted to see if I could find any answers to my idea that the most socially beneficial form of banking is zero percent banking. Talk about a voice in the wilderness! Or almost. Only a couple of people could see that interest is what kills all liklihood of economic fairness. In order to press my point of view I had to do some very heavy thinking in response to all the usual arguments trotted out in favour of interest. A point of importance is that those defending interest had a deep involvement in economic training and were thus committed to the cause and at first blush, blind to the alternative. Those of us against interest are unschooled in economic theory and I count this as a blessing as we are not married to our degrees or training.

For months on end I would find myself pacing outside, puffing away, going over the arguments for and against and presenting my conclusions to the group. We were joined by an engineer, Marc Gauvin, who designed a currency system he calls bibo currency (bibocurrency.org) who was better able to argue from a mathematical standpoint. I'm happy to say that at least half, if not more of the group now understand our reasoning and agree with it.

The point is this. I struggled with the group and wrestled madly with the topic, and the longer I did this (gaining knowledge along the way), the faster various insights hit me. Each insight left no room for doubt that they were correct. Absolutely none! The certainty of their correctness is staggering considering I've always tended to leave all options open knowing I can't know everything and therefore I could be wrong about everything.

In order to present my views logically, in depth, I had to grow in knowledge by thinking extremely hard, by expending maximum effort. And the funny thing is........the thinking was a joy.

A strange thing happened while this was going on. When I joined the group I was adamant that Conspiracy Theorists were nuts. The only conspiracy I'd consider was one that left a paper trail I could follow. As I accumulated knowledge I started to see things I wouldn't have thought possible, connections I couldn't have made before. The liklihood of conspiracies existing became greater than the liklihood of them not. And my curiosity, which I had thought encompassed just about everything, grew to encompass more. And then I discovered Cassiopaea. A lot of confirmation and tons more explanations came my way for which I'm (hopefully) eternally grateful. Hallelujah!

So ultimately, if you're not sure you're really awake, I would suggest finding a subject that interests you, that you know very little about, and try to think your way through it - as much as possible without references. The magic happens with the thinking and you'll have that aha! moment, that moment you think "so this is what being awake feels like".

And it's all due to the wonder of thinking.

 

[anart]

We talk about being constantly asleep, but do we all understand exactly what is being said?

So ultimately, if you're not sure you're really awake, I would suggest finding a subject that interests you, that you know very little about, and try to think your way through it - as much as possible without references. The magic happens with the thinking and you'll have that aha! moment, that moment you think "so this is what being awake feels like".

And it's all due to the wonder of thinking.

Actually, Richard, when we use the term 'asleep' here we use it in the esoteric sense, which is a bit different from what you seem to be suggesting. Yes, actively thinking is important and useful but even people who can actually think can still be sound asleep in the esoteric sense. In other words, real thinking is necessary in order to awaken, but thinking doesn't mean that a person is esoterically awake. There are many people who are experts on all sorts of things, who can think quite complexly and thoroughly on any number of concrete topics who are still lost in slumber regarding objective reality.

 

[SoCurious]

Actually, Richard, when we use the term 'asleep' here we use it in the esoteric sense, which is a bit different from what you seem to be suggesting. Yes, actively thinking is important and useful but even people who can actually think can still be sound asleep in the esoteric sense. In other words, real thinking is necessary in order to awaken, but thinking doesn't mean that a person is esoterically awake. There are many people who are experts on all sorts of things, who can think quite complexly and thoroughly on any number of concrete topics who are still lost in slumber regarding objective reality.

All absolutely true. Every word. The distinction you make is terribly important. I would like to suggest that one method to become esoterically awake is to become more aware, and this happens through the application of thought. Every aha! moment, every instance of illumination increases awareness making it a little easier to increase esoteric awareness when one's thought is turned that way. These aha! moments are a little strange in that although there is a certain consequential logic followed the answer seems to pop into existence from nowhere. The Eureka! phenomenon.

I may be wrong but it seems to me that the process of intense and prolonged thought is the act of Asking (as opposed to begging and commanding and as long as anticipation does not accompany the thought process) and the Eureka flash is the Answering. This could be like opening a conduit to our higher selves which seems to pretty esoteric in itself. With the conduit open I would imagine the state of being esoterically awake would be within reach.

I know I'm not there and it feels like I'm not really even near but my understanding is that without the intense and active use of thought and imagination truly awakening is not on the cards.

 

[Al Today]

Hi Richard,

Thanks for this thread. You've been thinking about zero percent banking? And talking about the sleepers... Cancel the fed! Let gubemint again control OUR money and borrow money from itself. (Is this zero percent banking?)

I've thought for years on this. Get rid of those cowardly/hidden profiteers, that pirate robber bank called the Fed. Our gubemint can then borrow money from itself and pay realistic interest back to itself (We The People), or some beneficial programs that result in true economy stimulation. Too easy, I know...

Paying the national debt owed to a private institution, that bunch of corporate profiteers has interest owed that is metastasizing as a cancer, to the point of unsustainability. Interest to a private institution, one that ignores audits and rule over us here in usa is disgusting so say the least.

As defined with the Constitution, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution:

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures

Gubemint has the legal right to print money, as defined within the Constitution. Some greedy psychopaths SNUCK in and created the fed in 1913. The power to print money was given to a private company called The Fed. And hell, the Fed gives money to whomever they please and don't think they need to say to who? (Who vs. Whom) They do what they want, what they will with absolutely no respect to Us, We The People. It's all a big freaking secret. That's our freaking money... Arrogant bastards...

And another thought about banks dragging us all into economic hell:
After the great depression, the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 separated commercial and investment banking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act

One may say that banksters greedily profiting from crap-shoot investment schemes of the rich was a major cause of the Great Depression. And what happened because of psychopathic greed, and the short memory of the American people? The Glass–Steagall Act of 1933 was basically stripped and repealed in 1999. Again the greed flourished, rich got richer, and here we are again...
Round and Round, as the Universe goes...

Yep, I know. Subjective and emotional.

 

[SoCurious]

Hi Al,

I've been down a long and torturous path on this one. It is ludicrous that a country agrees to borrow money from private banks - with interest on top of it. The wealth of a nation is a product of its people and their input by way of contribution to their society. To pay outside interests for the fruits of you own labour is plain silly.

When I talk of zero interest banking I'm talking of a banking system whereby credit is given interest free. Where partnerships between the two parties are entered into that allows the bank to cover their costs. As banking is a necessity of life in any money system it should be a function of a public rather than a private nature. Interest requires a constant growth of the economy as in order to pay interest and capital more has to be produced than was borrowed. In a finite world (think finite resouces such as ores and minerals) it is a mathematical certainty that there is a ceiling on growth. It is therefore blindness to the future that we insist on a system that requires continual growth. As growth continues the rate of growth must necessarily slow down. Interest never slows down though and the net result is that we end up owing more and more and more and more and in such a case we become owned, or if you will, slaves to the creditor. When you think about it long enough you'll also realize that it is not just interest at fault. The profit motive has exactly the same effect whether interest is involved or not.

The case for capitalism is extremely weak and all the people who favour it are blind to the reality that it is an elaborate system designed to ultimately turn every person on the planet, bar one, into economic slaves. It is a system of competition and as with every competition there can only be one person left standing at the end. Capitalism and competition are inimical to real democracy. True democracy can only occur in a socialist system which is based on cooperation, something women find far easier to grok than men.

In the end you're left with the realization that in order to end poverty, ensure democracy and equality, concepts such a private ownership of land, discoveries, knowledge or any resource has to disappear. Money too should disappear, for as long as there is any way for one person to have more than another, or control of any one thing, the incentive for some people will always be there to have it all, and we know for some there is nothing they won't do to have it all.

Charles Eisenstein maintains that in the beginning we had a Gift Economy. Basically it means that when we lived together and noticed that one of our number was short of something we would gift that person with what was lacking. There was no credit and no debit, simply a gift. When the next person was needy the relevant gift would be given. It could be that some needed more often than others and some never needed at all but that was no matter. What did matter however was that this system provided stability and security, physically and psychologically. A society such as this would have no incentive for war or other anti-social behaviours.

I'd like to live in a gift society. Very STO. Now, how do we get from here to there before the Wave strikes? lol........talk about wishful thinking!

 

[SeekinTruth]

Just to add, besides all the other problems with capitalism mentioned, the banking system specifically is a total scam. First when the system "creates money" and lends it out with interest, there isn't enough money in the system to actually pay back the principal AND the interest "owed." Because only the amount to lend was "created" -- the principal -- where is the added interest supposed to come from. It's a system designed to created perpetual debt that can never be paid off. Even more important, most people think that the creditor/bank gave them their own money to use. But this is not the case, it's just an accounting trick when it comes to the current banking system.

The "credit/money" is created out of thin air. Then an "obligation" is created to pay back something PLUS interest that never existed in the first place until this bogus agreement was made: it's pure nonsense. The whole "obligation" is hokus pokus in this system. Except the kicker is that if the person given this "credit" fails to make good on his "obligation," the creditor has the legal right to take actual valuable things into its own possession to satisfy the supposed "obligation." I can't think of a bigger scam.

 

[mkrnhr]

the creditor has the legal right to take actual valuable things into its own possession to satisfy the supposed "obligation."

This way, they just take possession of real things (land, etc.) in exchange of thin air (or less).

Edit: It's a perfect example of extreme STS operation: taking without giving.

 

[Gertrudes]

All absolutely true. Every word. The distinction you make is terribly important. I would like to suggest that one method to become esoterically awake is to become more aware, and this happens through the application of thought. Every aha! moment, every instance of illumination increases awareness making it a little easier to increase esoteric awareness when one's thought is turned that way. These aha! moments are a little strange in that although there is a certain consequential logic followed the answer seems to pop into existence from nowhere. The Eureka! phenomenon.

While thought is certainly a factor, you may be forgetting that we are beings that process the world through thought, emotions, and our physical senses. Gurdjieff called these our three centres.
It is an easy trap to get caught in one centre at the expense of the others, in that way we become something similar to an expert, we are petty good at understanding a small part, we can describe it in great detail, know all about its workings, but lose complete perspective of the whole. Current medicine is an excellent example of that.
And can we really say we understand even that part if we are not integrating it with the whole? In the end I don't think we can, because the understanding we have from one isolated part is very different from the understanding we would have from that same part when taken within the greater picture. In this context, thought would be the part that is integrated within the whole that is us, with emotions and a physical body continuously giving us input, if we care to listen.

This isn't to say you are doing the above Richard, but given your emphasis on thought and thought alone on your posts above, I thought I'd mention.

The case for capitalism is extremely weak and all the people who favour it are blind to the reality that it is an elaborate system designed to ultimately turn every person on the planet, bar one, into economic slaves. It is a system of competition and as with every competition there can only be one person left standing at the end. Capitalism and competition are inimical to real democracy. True democracy can only occur in a socialist system which is based on cooperation, something women find far easier to grok than men.

Have you read Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine"? If you haven't I think you'd probably like it, she talks about a capitalistic system in great detail and the way privatization under a label of "economic freedom" and "free market" has, in reality, gradually been destroying our economy and, to use your words, completely destroying the system's "stability and security, physically and psychologically".

 

[SoCurious]

While thought is certainly a factor, you may be forgetting that we are beings that process the world through thought, emotions, and our physical senses. Gurdjieff called these our three centres.
It is an easy trap to get caught in one centre at the expense of the others, in that way we become something similar to an expert, we are petty good at understanding a small part, we can describe it in great detail, know all about its workings, but lose complete perspective of the whole.

Thanks Gertrudes. Balance is indeed the key.

I am generalizing because I watch the reactions of those around me to events and when I say we I am referring to humankind as a collective. The first thing that strikes me is that responses to events are met firstly on an emotional level. Gut feelings dictate rationalizing. There is very little real sit-down-and-think-this-through response. People react precisely as indoctrinated. There is no deep level thought.

It appears that we run mostly on emotion and through the continual presence of distractions such as sports and tv we are being trained to think less. Through the design and growth of cities with their suburbs together with a deterioration of diet our physical needs are being bypassed. But its easier to exercise and improve diet than it is to think. *

To achieve balance we need to relearn the trick of thinking (without forgetting the emotional and physical centers) and this is why I'm emphasizing thought. Very often we just think we're thinking when all we're doing is rationalizing a given circumstance and we need a metaphorical kick up the backside to get us moving to the realm of real thought.

I haven't read Naomi Klein's book and I believe its fantastic, but I do read articles of hers when I come across them. She's really good. Naomi Wolf and Chris Hedges also count amongst my favourites but top of my list is Arundhati Roy. To me she is the queen of liberal prose :)

* Actually, improving our physical status is becoming more difficult. The constant push to poison us through diet, pollution and drugs is becoming so much more difficult to counter.

 

[Arreis13]

Thank you very much. I have been so hard on myself my entire life yet recently I have been wondering why? I appreciate the post I look forward to the idea of finally liking me. :)

 

[Gertrudes]

Thanks Gertrudes. Balance is indeed the key.

I am generalizing because I watch the reactions of those around me to events and when I say we I am referring to humankind as a collective. The first thing that strikes me is that responses to events are met firstly on an emotional level. Gut feelings dictate rationalizing. There is very little real sit-down-and-think-this-through response. People react precisely as indoctrinated. There is no deep level thought.

I agree in that people do react, but find that people's reactions aren't necessarily emotional but rather mechanical and lacking in awareness. As I see it, due to us actually being so detached from our real emotions it is extremely hard for us to experience them in their raw state. In fact, emotions (and feelings) are more often then not rationalized, we think emotions rather then feeling them, and instead of having a well functioning emotional core and a well functioning mind, and even a well functioning bodily sensate, we have a mess of things mixed together because they were never allowed to be fully experienced in the first place.

It appears that we run mostly on emotion and through the continual presence of distractions such as sports and tv we are being trained to think less.

Perhaps you are speaking from the premise that when people react in what appears to be an emotional way, their emotions are actually being fully felt? Here is where I think lies the problem. They aren't, I really don't think they are, at all. Emotions have been stiffled for a lifetime, so much so that we end up with an unrecognizable response to stimulus, a response that looks like something that isn't, and that can be very hard to track down to its roots.

To achieve balance we need to relearn the trick of thinking (without forgetting the emotional and physical centers) and this is why I'm emphasizing thought. Very often we just think we're thinking when all we're doing is rationalizing a given circumstance and we need a metaphorical kick up the backside to get us moving to the realm of real thought.

I agree, but would also add that we need to learn how to really feel. In the same way we often think we're thinking, we also think we're feeling, sensing, and so on. We think when we should feel, we feel when we should think, we fall prey to our hormones when we'd better be thinking, and so on. The point being that in the end we have a huge mess of thoughts, emotions, and sensations that have never functioned properly.

My 2 cents fwiw..

I haven't read Naomi Klein's book and I believe its fantastic, but I do read articles of hers when I come across them. She's really good. Naomi Wolf and Chris Hedges also count amongst my favourites but top of my list is Arundhati Roy. To me she is the queen of liberal prose :)

Yes, Naomi Klein has done her research. I find her "Shock Doctrine", the only thing I have read from her so far, essential reading :) In fact, I have to listen to it again (I have an audio book), there is a staggering amount of information in there, at least for a newbie like me.
I have been curious about Naomi Wolf and used to get the two Naomis mixed up :) Thanks for bringing those authors up, my understanding of politics and current world affairs used to be so weak that I literally had to push myself to get started on some themes I had never even glanced upon. But once started, you just have to know more!
I'm still highly ignorant in these themes, but slowly getting a bit more knowledge....slowly...