Guest guest Posted November 17, 2005 Report Share Posted November 17, 2005 Doc Houston, > While doing the above does not tell us " who we really are " it does > teach us > how to live " at cause " vs " at effect " . > > Does this cover pretty much any lesson someone is here to learn? > > Is there a context or content learning where this wouldn't work? Ummm... the absence of a guiding morality disturbs me. I do understand that if there wasn't a purpose for evil, decadence or decay, it wouldn't be so prevalent. Judgment/morality - very loaded values. Judgment, to me, IS calibrating. Most sociopaths have no trouble forming and executing a goal. They tend to calibrate, too. So - was Hitler's goal achieved, or just ill-formed? There is context, because we are part of a human fabric, in time, on this earth. ie - positive learnings - have a value -- vs negative learnings or no learnings. Implies change, transformation. Striving toward..., achieving what? Helen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2005 Report Share Posted November 17, 2005 Helen and ALL, The nominalization " guiding morality " disturbs me more than the more grounded " short and long term consequences for my actions " . Morality is personal, even if we want it to be all encompassing. For me " guiding morality " would be a way to give others responsibility for my actions where " consequences for my actions " gives me better " at cause " ability. Even if I gave up my responsibility to some " guiding morality " I would still be personally accountable and responsible. (I think of the " guiding morality " of the crusades, the Salem Witch Trials, Slavery, conservatism, liberalism, Christianity, Islam, etc.) Or the " guiding morality " in Texas if you shoot an intruder make sure he falls forward into the house, not backwards out of the house. That is the difference between moral and immoral down here. The harder thing for a people to do is give responsibility and accountability of freedom to self and others, including to children. Instead of living by rules, practice living by consequences. Allow the consequences to be the determiner of whether or not the action is taken. This type of structure produces better well-formed outcomes and intentions and would bring judgment and calibration into closer alignment. At present judgment and calibration can seem similar, and even be put in the same category, but judgment is based on " personal interpretation " of the past while calibration is based on achieving a future outcome or goal without " personal judgment " . A Well Formed Intention -goal or outcome does take into account " short and long term consequences for my actions " without the added confusion or pressure of a " guiding morality " . Who's definition of morality would be use? Which one would we all agree upon? Sociopaths (i.e Hitler, etc.) do have trouble forming and executing well-formed goals. They do ignore and refuse to take into account all possible consequences because they formed their goal on judgement and ill-formed outcomes, not calibration. They do live by their " guiding morality " . They have their reasons and they are moral in their map. They just don't calibrate or judge how their " guiding morality " will be affect by the consequences of their actions. The context I prefer is ALL possible consequences. The more one practices calibration the more one begins to see more possible consequences. If we are going to use the metaphor learning, then both positive and negative learnings have value. Judgment adds the value of positive or negative to the learning. Calibration just takes it all as feedback and makes adjustments based on achieving the Well-Formed Outcome, which automatically takes into account " short and long term consequences for actions " To Your Best, Dr. Houston Vetter Healing and Beyond Healing to Spirituality http://www.achieve-your-potential.com/deep-peat.html At 08:57 PM 11/16/2005, you wrote: Ummm... the absence of a guiding morality disturbs me. I do understand that if there wasn't a purpose for evil, decadence or decay, it wouldn't be so prevalent. Judgment/morality - very loaded values. Judgment, to me, IS calibrating. Most sociopaths have no trouble forming and executing a goal. They tend to calibrate, too. So - was Hitler's goal achieved, or just ill-formed? There is context, because we are part of a human fabric, in time, on this earth. ie - positive learnings - have a value -- vs negative learnings or no learnings. Implies change, transformation. Striving toward..., achieving what? Helen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.