Positive Learnings can mean evil deeds, can it not?

[Guest guest]

, Helen

Driscoll <helen@i...> wrote:

> Ummm... the absence of a guiding morality disturbs me.

 

That's because of your definition of " morality " .

 

Change that to an " ideal " and see how it feels.

 

> I do understand that if there wasn't a purpose for evil, decadence

>or decay, it wouldn't be so prevalent.

 

Growth.

 

> Judgment/morality - very loaded values. Judgment, to me, IS

>calibrating.

 

How about " away-from " and " towards " ?

 

> Most sociopaths have no trouble forming and executing a goal. They

>tend to calibrate, too.

 

Yes, but what is their ideal?

 

They normally don't have one.

 

What is their time line?

 

Usually they don't not see/feel/hear/understand the consequences of

their present actions.

 

> So - was Hitler's goal achieved, or just ill-formed?

 

Which goal, and in which portion of his life?

 

According to Hawkins, Hitler scored very high in the earlier portion

of his life, but in the later part scored very low.

 

And his path does demonstrate that.

 

> There is context, because we are part of a human fabric, in time,

>on this earth.

 

That IS a context.

 

And, add to that context a bigger definition of what a human soul

is, then what do you get?

 

> ie - positive learnings - have a value -- vs negative learnings or

>no learnings.

 

Going back to your earlier definition, calibration of away-froms and

towards...until eventually, though experiences, one reaches a point

where they start to chunk up to the higher realms, when they are

ready (I know this is simplistic, but what the Hell)...

 

>Implies change, transformation. Striving toward...,

> achieving what?

 

Achieving THEIR own personal and very private evolution.

 

 

 

> Helen

>

[Guest guest]

>

> That's because of your definition of " morality " .

>

> Change that to an " ideal " and see how it feels.

>

 

I like the word " morality' -- to me it means an ethical code that is

embodied in spirit. Courage, if you like.

 

Ideal is a great word too.

 

But, after spending a few hours on Stanford U's philosophy website - I

'should' have said a guiding 'meta-ethics'.

 

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-relativism/

 

A guiding 'meta-ethics " -- implies a framework - a structure that

accommodates conflicting moralities and judgments.

 

When people are changing their behaviors, they can feel at sea.

(especially if intense religious frames are coming down)

 

And, they have to make choices every day in their life. So a framework

helps (for some people, probably global thinking types ....)

 

For example - in the 70's and 80's - this psycho-saying was extremely

popular as an answer to life's complexities:

 

" if it feels good, do it "

 

Okay.

 

I had a friend who was in the bush, in Vietnam, for 2 years. A marine.

He told me way back then, that some people really like to kill. It

feels really good to kill. Amazing power rush. Probably the ultimate

power rush.

 

So - if he operated under the the 1970's meta-ethic (instead of a John

Wayne meta-ethic) :

 

If it feels good, do it???

 

He was highly kinesthetic too. What kind of nihilism results.

 

I've seen an enormous amount of social nihilism, living here in

LA/Hollywood for 25 years, during which time people were 'working on

themselves'.

 

So, if a meta-ethical frame is addressed with a client, before and

during healing work, they can calibrate the positive changes.

 

Judgment doesn't have to be judgment, but can be reframed as 'standard'.

 

And, you calibrate to a standard...

 

Off the soapbox!

 

Helen