Saturday, 10 October 2015
Written by Mathew Naismith
I had a very interesting rebuttal in regards to my quote. "It is wise to be influential, it is unwise to be predominantly influential for there is no wisdom in one's own influence".
The quote is referring to it's wise to be influential, why be aware and wise without sharing it? The last part of the quote is also referring to it's unwise to be egotistical in sharing in one's own influences, "My own influence is the be and end all". How many ideologies have taken this view? "This is all the knowledge you need which of course negates all other ideologies". This view in my mind isn't true, where is the wisdom in just knowing of one view when the world around us is of numerous influences?
Predominantly knowing about one ideology only tells us of a certain influence within our environment, would a truly wise person then ignore all other influences within their environment? Not to me.
The rebuttal I received in relation to this quote was extended and quite analytical, to them, my quote was totally grammatically incorrect so made no sense at all. The following is part of the reply I received from this person.
Firstly, influences do not make you wise. In fact, the more you are influenced, the less integrity and strength of character you have. You should never, never, never be influences by anyone or anything. You should analyze everything yourself until you arrive at your own conclusions.
My own experiences have indeed made me wiser which are mainly based on other people's influence on me, for example, school teachers influenced me so I could read a write for starters. I also certainly don't believe in analysing everything myself, this is an indication of the ego being in control. Vast amounts of knowledge usually turn into egotism not wisdom unless we are aware of this. Many people thinks that wisdom can only come from knowledge and not from other people's influence upon us. I can myself analyse too much because of the knowledge I have, but because I'm aware and not just knowledgeable, I am often aware of how my analytical reasoning can, and most often does, influence me to incorrectly egotistically judge and analyse.
Knowledge allows one to analyse, awareness then allows one to analyse free of egotism, wisdom then tells us this is but the tip of the iceberg, no knowledge is the be and end all as everything is always evolving as the environment around us tells us. It is wise to be influential and being aware that knowledge is always evolving, what is known today wont' be known tomorrow as this knowing is always changing.
I think we can put too much emphasis on knowledge and being educated especially to the point when the ego takes complete control of us. A brain predominantly based purely on analytics most often replaces our intuition and our natural instincts. At this point, we will only analyse our environment purely based on analytics and the knowledge we have at hand at that point. In this case, we are foregoing any influence of our own intuition and natural instincts giving us a totally different perspective of all things.
As of this post, a lot of my posts come from other people's influences upon me, if I only relied on my own insights and the influences I have had in my life, my posts wouldn't be worth reading. It would be like dogmatically following a certain ideology to the bitter end no matter what. My own wisdom tells me this action would be daft, an action of no relevance towards a constructive outcome.
As we become spiritually aware, we will become open to other influences beyond human perceptions, should we then ignore these influences because our analytical analysis can't perceive beyond human perceptions? We must remember, human knowledge is limited to it's own human perceptions, further knowing can only be obtained through perceiving beyond these human perceptions that at first make no sense. This takes one to be aware of perceptions and knowledge beyond our own human perceptions and analytics. This is fundamentally why knowledge isn't the same as awareness or that knowledge can bring on awareness or wisdom, it can actually be limited to it's own perceptions, you don't get this with awareness because you are aware of this for starters.
If I analysed all the quotes I have read through human perceptions and knowing, very few of the quotes I read would make sense, in actuality, a lot of the quotes I have read seem to come from a perceptions beyond human analytics and perception.
Can we become too analytical? Most definitely as all analytics are based purely on human perceptions which are limited, sorry ego.......Analytics are based purely on comprehension, if the analytical mind doesn't comprehend it, it just can't exist or it makes no sense.
Should everything we are open to make sense? I hope not, if this was the case I wouldn't be evolving. Fire didn't make sense to cavemen, did they then put the fire out because their analytical minds couldn't work out how fire actually existed? What they relied on was intuition and their natural instincts, their egos didn't need to know any more than this.
I think it's wise to be aware that knowledge alone will not bring on wisdom, if this was the case, we wouldn't be as destructive as we are now, it would be quite the opposite. Wisdom can't destroy, especially what it relies on for it's existence, but knowledge used on it's own can and most often is highly destructive. It would certainly seem our knowledge is ignoring the influences around us otherwise we would indeed change our ways. To me it makes no sense in ignoring the influences we have around us but that is what a lot of us are obviously doing.
This is purely based on that knowledge gives us wisdom and the influences around us don't. In a sense this seems correct, we have all this influence around us but we are no wiser!! In actuality, a lot of us are wiser specifically because of the influences around us. The only people who seem to lack wisdom are the people who wholly rely purely on human knowledge and perceptions to obtain wisdom. I would myself rather rely on the influences of people and other sources around me to make me more aware of wisdom, human analytical perceptions just don't do it for me, they are way too limited but each to their own.
Monday, 3 March 2014
Written by Mathew Naismith
This is going on from my last couple of posts to do with living our own story or path. We obviously all have our own story we want to live or are living by, each story is unique, no two stories are exactly alike mainly because of the influences of other people living out their story directly around us. This doesn’t or shouldn’t stop us from living out our own story, yes we are influenced but others around us however we still have our own story to live. If we want to allow other stories to influence our own story that is up to us as a whole however we must remember we are all living in a greater story!! It’s like a story within a much larger story; these much larger stories do & can influence us against our will changing our story, war is a good example & so is consumerist materialism. These are stories that are more collective therefore more influential than our own individual story.
Living our own story doesn’t seem collective but what makes up a collective? What makes up a collective is smaller stories so everyone who is living in their own story is being collective within a larger story. At the moment we are talking about war or consumerist materialism being the larger collective story here, what about becoming spiritually aware, is it not collective to be as one as well and what gives us oneness? It’s a collective condition of multiple stories under one story; in this case we have replaced the larger story of war or consumerist materialism with oneness however we are still being influenced by war & consumerist materialism but to a far lesser extent, they are no longer the main influential story we live under.
We can take on the main story as being our own, many people do this. A soldier becomes a soldier because of having to have armed forces & a multinational becomes a multinational because of consumers consuming material goods. Without individuals living out their own story & being coaxed into the main story the main collective story wouldn’t exist. It takes many individual stories to make a collective, you can’t have true oneness if one story or person wanted to become at one. I think oneness only exists because of a collective, if you don’t have a collective you don’t have true oneness. Because everything is consciousness, either it be of a God or an intelligent energy source, it takes a conscious collective consciousness to create things like war & oneness.
What creates a religion, it’s not one person just living out their own story separate to every other conscious source, it’s a collective coming together to be influenced by one story. There are so many stories we can live under either it be by choice or not, the real question is now, are any of these stories wrong for us to become influenced by? Is it wrong to believe in a God as opposed to an intelligent conscious source or to join in a collective like religion or consumerist materialism? The collective that it creates itself isn’t wrong but we must realise it can do harm onto others or force other to join under a collective story that they don’t want to be influenced by. We do have a choice in what story we live by however sometimes in making that choice we do have to suffer.
We all at one stage or another feel non-accepting of other people’s individual & collective stories like the many different religions out there for example. As soon as we become non-accepting we have allowed these other stories to influence us like for example a lot of people don’t like the word God. As soon as we have reacted to this word & what it means we have become influenced by it. God, to a lot of spiritually aware people these days, doesn’t mean a white bearded man or even a higher supreme being but a consciousness that is more aware than our own individual or even collective conscious selves. Yes a lot of non-religious people have a problem with religion & the belief in a God. The problem is that religion &/or the belief in a God hasn’t proven itself to be reliable or even ethical in the past, religion & the belief in a God in itself has done a lot of harm right throughout history but of course it’s done a lot of good as well.
I use to have a problem with religion & the belief in a supreme God myself but I don’t anymore for the main reason I have accepted other people’s stories that they wish to live under, as soon as I push my story onto others I have become what religion has done at times in human history. We must allow others to think for themselves & live by any story they wish. Accepting others people’s stories doesn’t mean we are going to live by their story nor does it mean we should allow them to hurt us in anyway through living their story, what acceptance does is to disallow any influence of these stories we don’t want to live by to influence us period. Like I said, as soon as we respond by disliking someone else’s story we have allowed that story to influence us.
So many spiritually aware people these days have a problem with the word God or anything relating to religion period, this is allowing these stories we don’t accept to influence us. Once we accept that others have a right to live by their own stories, like we do, these stories have very little effect on our own stories lived. This is sort of like reverse psychology funny enough!!!