Evil is characterized by opposition. So opposition breeds more of itself.


Outside of Borrowed Meaning in Cognitive Bias

Virtual Interaction Theory

Remember I said earlier that we can’t really invent symbols?

It’s all already there. Yes. We are already working from a bedrock of meaning. We just dismiss it as childhood fantasy, but you can’t fully and completely ignore it. You just engage in aggressive reinterpretation.

You put people into roles, that you originally assigned to environmental elements, because these seem safer. You believed that the rock chose to trip you, but that it didn’t do it very often and could be easily avoided. People are safer if they are seen as rocks, so you rationalize that they can behave as rocks do, take on rock like characteristics, being indifferent, insensitive, objective and only materially responsive. This of course gives permission for the use of force. It’s supposedly all right to kick the rock. Am I wrong?

But even objective presences defy your objectification. Can you ignore the lands feelings and have healthy fertile crops?

We reduce everything in our environment to a least common denominator. This makes thinking easier. It’s the only way we can even conceive of the abstract. We speak of the elements of a thing, and things being elementary. This is of course where and why thinking gets twisted.

Everyone familiar with the Blue Song?

It’s not easy being blue… Is it easy being a thinking being?

Now I will ask, what are you outside of the social? Outside of borrowed meaning?

Intuitives. Souls. You are what the cat sees, what the bird sees, what the sky sees.

SEE ALSO:  Most Human Experience

I imagine that I can pick and choose among borrowed meanings. Actually, you can pick among a broader range than that. We reflexively borrow meaning from all the life around us. You know whether an animal seems to like you or not, yes?

Yes. Yet it can only share a very narrow part of your sense of meaning, if even that, but you understand what you mean to it. Is this not so?

I feel that I do, yes. How does it feel to inhabit the meaning your pet gives you? You understand more than your thinking, but you might hold your thinking up between you and the animal. Is it really a blue dog? Are you really a blue person? Are you really that thought? Does the animal know what that thought is? Or does it know something else?

Something else altogether, I’m thinking.

My dogs are my friends, part of my family, part of my pack.

And you can share nothing of that? I think we share in that despite ourselves, despite being so busy thinking and supposedly knowing things.

I feel that I share it, but I also suspect that I’m projecting a lot of it onto the dog. The dog projects a lot onto you then. Otherwise, how could it like you? I think people give too much credit to the idea of projection, more of that obsessive fascination with thinking.

SEE ALSO:  Intuitive Cooking with Dyan Garris

I think there is common ground despite human rationalization. In all the effort humans make to be realistic, how in touch with reality are they?

Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.

Travis Saunders
Dragon Intuitive
~science,mysticism,spirituality~

(Bold, italicized text is input from One World class participants. Thank you!)

If you enjoyed this page:
Keep Reading »


Recommended for you

Leave Your Insight

(required)