Subjective Analysis Re-examined

Written by Mathew Naismith

I had an interesting discussion with a bloke in relation to my last post titled, Subjective and Objective Analysis, it seems I didn’t explain myself too well. The post wasn’t about being anti-subjective thinking, which is analysing through feelings, but balancing out our subjective analysis when we have distaste for something we are analysing.  To me the world at present is a good example of how subjective analysis of each other is distorting our reality making it more volatile, all I am saying is in this situation, we need to use more objective analysis to balance out our over emotional  reactions. Hopefully the following will elaborate on this a little further starting off with this blokes queries of my last post in question.       

I do not believe we disagree on the general thrust of your claims.  I take issue solely with one claim:  the imaginary possibility of objectivity as a perspective from which we may safely acquire knowledge.  There is no other perspective than the one into which we are thrown.  Mood or emotion is part of our experience, as it is with our memory.  It may no more be extracted and preserve the original experience than we may detach ourselves from our bodies and imagine that experience is possible without them (dreams, perhpas, although they will still reference the body and the physical sphere).  That emotions can cloud our judgment or distort what we are seeing is not being denied.  What is denied is that we can (or should) be without emotion in the appropriation of experience that becomes knowledge.  We achieve critical distance from our emotions and biases by re-examination of our experiences and by making conscious that lens by which we came to understand this or that experience.

My Reply

It sounds like a claim doesn't it, it's just a generalization brought about by my own observation.

I don't think we are disagreeing as a whole, we just don’t see each other’s perspectives on this matter that is all.  

Emotions are a part of how we learn, there is no doubt to that however, what the post is about is analysing something we are anti to, if we are analysing anything we have distaste for, what I’m am stating is subjective analysis will distort our feeling even more where’s  objective analysis will balance out such feelings.  We don’t need to add more fire to the fire for the fire to burn, it’s burning quite well on it’s own, the world at present, with it’s subjective analysing, is to me quite clearly showing how subjective thought is emotionally distorting reality.

Subjective analysis is about analysing a wrong or right, black and white, if we are too emotional when we analyse in this way, we will over exemplify what actually is. Yes, in a situation where we are not showing distaste, subjective analysis works fine but what I am saying, if we are showing distaste to something we are analysing we will distort reality, the truth.  As soon as we show distaste, we quite automatically use subjective analysis instead of objective analysis, in my mind we need to be more aware of this.   

I’m not anti-subjective thinking but the post is about subjective and objective analysis when in distaste of anything we analyse.

The funny thing is, spirituality takes away the black and white judgment of subjective analysing when using subjective analysis, this in turn gives us more of balance between subjective and objective thought however, I might not be totally correct in this analysis but I think I’m close to it.  Being spiritually aware, feelings become a major part of our lives and that is what we analyse through however in this case because we are spiritually aware and non-judgemental, the black and white are not judged as being opposite to each other or opposing each other.  Because we are not judging, we are less likely to be influenced by our over exemplified emotions allowing us to be as objective as we are subjective within our analysis giving us balance.  

There is also big difference between emotions and feelings when spiritually aware; we actually become less emotional even though at times it seems to be the other way around.  What we feel makes us emotional but the feelings themselves aren’t emotional, they create emotions within us through us opening to such inner feelings but these feelings aren’t themselves emotional.  How do we become less emotional? We end up taking these feelings within our stride, in other words we become less emotional about these feelings the more they become the norm.  Don’t get me wrong, this doesn’t take away the feelings we get and in actual fact the more the normal these feelings are to us the more we will feel. 

It is quite interesting observing how spiritualty quite automatically balances out the way we subjectively and objectively analyse, this kind of mentality dispels fanatical thinking, a thought process that over exemplifies it’s opposites causing further chaos.  We no longer see extremes but a reality of similarities brought about by our inner feelings that are no longer emotionally controlled or choke by such emotions, we become balanced with our truer selves. There is no longer a struggle between the push and pull effect, subjective objective analysis.  

Supplement:  My Reply

This is why I concurred with what was written in the link supplied that referred to the psychological aspects of this, instead of just analysing through objective analysis, they need to also analyse through subjective analysis.  This is turn balances out the analysis between objective and subjective thought giving us a better evaluation.

What you seem to be saying is you deny such equivocation exist, there is no separation between subjective and objective thought, this is true to an extent.  To us this separation exists, that is true, however in true reality this separation doesn’t exist, but we don’t exist in a true reality as per se. 

To un-separate such mentalities, we need to give balance back into our thinking by using both subjective and objective analysis at the same time as stipulated in the article on psychologists abandoning the subjective—objective divide.  

The reason I stated that subjective analysis is about a wrong and right, black and white is it’s about judgment and separation of supposed opposites giving us a more emotional response. What I am saying is we don’t need to be any more emotional when we are analysing anything we have a disdain for and gives us more separation. What I am also saying is objective analysis gives us the balance we need in this case.

I agree with you, there is no true separation between objective and subjective analysis however at present, we are living as if there is, that is what I’m working with at present.  It is easy for people like you and I to see this but is it that simple for others to see this without bringing in balance between subjective and objective analysis?  The answer is no, we could tell them there is no separation but is this alone going to change their mentality? They need to become aware of living in balance between objective and subjective analysis before they will realise there is no separation between these two modes of thought.

Yes I could be incorrect with this analysis however I could also be correct, each to their own perspective.           

The Insecurities of the Sciences-Spirituality

Written by Mathew Naismith

This is funny, having an interest in psychology,  I thought I should have been able to answer a question I asked my wife last night not long after replying back to another science minded person who showed signs of being insecure, the question was, why are science minded people so insecure when conversing with spiritually minded people? It seems to have something to do with our belief in a higher power, a power greater than all the sciences put together, this is highly threatening to them.  

Before I go into this any further, we must determine what the signs of such insecurities are. The following is a reply I gave to another person in relation to how we react when we are insecure as a child and how we display the same insecure traits in adulthood.

“This is an interesting way of putting it but yes......insecurities give us biases. We are all quite bias when growing up because we are only aware of our immediate existence, this is like anyone being fixated to one ideological principle and thinking it's the be and end all, any other ideology questioning such an ideology will make these people feel insecure and make them react quite irrationally/illogically/foolishly, how does a child react when it's insecure? The same way!!”

The following was written by a self-proclaimed atheist pointing out the insecurities that some people have about their beliefs, he of course used a conversation he had with a religious person which in itself shows how insecure he was, why wasn’t he objective to start with instead of using an opposing ideological principle to he’s own to prove a point?  It’s funny how easy it is to point out other people’s insecurities but not so easy to see our own insecurities.

   

http://thrivebydesign.org/?p=519

I have had numerous discussions with atheists and science minded people, they are all too willing to point out the insecurities in other people’s ideological principles but their own. They’re not being incorrect altogether in pointing out these insecurities in others but because they are bias, they can’t see their own insecurities, this is how a bias attitude can give one flawed logics but of course they won’t see this either because of their insecurities.

When first starting out in these discussions, they usually start out rationally, but most often than not, these people will display an irrational behaviour after I have proved a point.  What kind of irrational behaviour am I talking about here? Name calling, narky remarks, dishonesty, being asked to scientifically prove every point I make but on the other hand they have excluded themselves from doing the same and so on.  Once I start to prove my points, especially scientifically, the irrationality gets even worse; my evidence is usually dismissed as nonsense even though such evidence was obtained from Professors in physics and psychologists for example.  I’ve even been told psychology isn’t a science even though science and psychology both derived from philosophy!!

Another indication of such insecurity is I’m a science basher even though I’m also into the sciences as well; this is a totally irrational statement brought on by an obvious insecurity of some kind. When these people are insecure, they will harp on the same thing over and over again like you are science bashing. This allows them psychologically to denounce anything you say as being factual or of any sort of truth by making themselves believe you are only a science basher. Do I get the same reaction from people into other kinds of ideologies such as spirituality? Yes but only if they feel insecure, a lot of truly spiritually aware people don’t react in an insecure way because they don’t feel threatened.  I also by the way have conversed with a number of science minded people who don’t react insecurely  either but see my point as I do of theirs, the discussion ends there.

In the religious Dark ages, the churches in Europe were afraid (insecure) of the sciences and of anyone of any other ideological principle but their own, there reaction of course was to rid themselves physically of such threatening people.  

Are the people who are science minded today showing signs of the same insecurities of the religious Dark Age? The reactions I get from other science minded people show me this is the case, they seem to be in fear of a more highly aware consciousness than the sciences they so much believe in. A higher consciousness will, especially if it’s of God like consciousness, make modern day science mundane. This would be catastrophically psychologically disturbing to most science minded people who think science is the be and end all. This is of course no different to telling a highly religious person that it’s been proven a God doesn’t exist, we are talking about pure fear here so we will indeed react irrationally. The Middle East is a good example of this at the moment, any kind of fanaticism is a good indication of an insecurity complex, this includes fanaticism in any ideological principle including the sciences.

It has been said to me, when relating modern day science mentality to the religious Dark Age mentality that science minded people don’t go around killing people not of their ideology.  I know by some of the reactions I’ve had that if certain science minded people could, they would kill everyone who is spiritual.  There fanaticism in the sciences tells me they would kill for their ideology if they could.  Science indeed has become a religion and a religion that is threatened by a possible higher power than theirs!!   

So it comes down to being aware of how threatening it is to others that it’s possible that a higher consciousness exists over and above their own ideological principles, being spiritually aware we must realise how threatening we seem to others who judge their ideologies to be the be and end all.  I don’t myself seem to have any ideology that can be threatened in this way, it truly wouldn’t worry me if it was proven that a higher consciousness didn’t exist, it would just prove I was incorrect within my assumptions  that is all. Certain science minded people on the other hand have a lot more to lose because they have put science above all else, we must show empathy and be considerate of their situation, it’s not easy for them especially psychologically. 

Spirituality of Awareness, Love, Light and Wisdom

Written by Mathew Naismith

Sitting back observing myself and others becoming aware, and further aware, gives me a view that spirituality void of any dogmas is of the light, a light within the darkness of ignorance.  Ignorance gives us ego, without ignorance the ego would be of little consequence; the ego certainly wouldn’t be ruling/controlling us without ignorance so why live in a reality based on ignorance especially considering ignorance can be quite destructive?

The reason ignorance is so destructive is this ego creates egotism and the more ignorant we are the more egotistical we become, for example, a lot of white men had slaves who were black. The reason for this is because black people were deemed as inferior to white people, an obvious show of utter ignorance and to own slaves had a lot to do with egotism as well showing ignorance and egotism goes hand in hand.  We can try all we like to take the controlling ego tendencies out of our lives but the controlling ego will always come back if we still live in ignorance as we are still creating an environment for the ego to exist in.  The easiest and surest way to rid ourselves of the controlling factors of the ego is rid ourselves of ignorance; the way to do this is become aware like through spiritual awareness.

Ignorance is related to the controlling ego and all of the ego’s tendencies, ignorance is also related to darkness in not being able to see and feel beyond our own ignorance, our own impeded awareness.  Ignorance is also related to a lack of wisdom, not being able to acknowledge what our own knowledge is destroying and how a lack of wisdom is impeding our common sense.  It makes sense why we are still warring and polluting the very thing we rely on for our own survival, we are still living in ignorance, so what are we living in ignorance of?

As mentioned, wisdom is one of these things we are ignorant too, without wisdom we are unable to use any knowledge sensibly and constructively but this is but one attribute that ignorance obscures from us.  The more aware, void of the controlling factors of the ego we become, the more loving we became and the more of the light we also become.  Wisdom tells us to become aware and while becoming aware we must also become unattached to the controlling factors of the ego, wisdom shows us away to become light and love instead of the darkness and chaos. One way to do this is become aware of our own ignorance first of all and how man has nearly always lived in ignorance. 

Becoming aware will not automatically disperse the ego even though we are no longer ignorant but aware, are we truly aware without being aware of wisdom; we must not just be spiritually aware but spiritually wise.  The only thing that can really dispel ignorance isn’t awareness or knowledge, it’s wisdom, the wisdom in knowing how to use such awareness and knowledge in the first place.  Science is about awareness and knowledge but look at how science is destroying our environment, this isn’t very wise, actually it’s ignorance of the harm of such effects science endeavours has on ourselves and the environment. 

How do we become wise instead of just knowledgeable?  Books are a good source of showing us how to use wisdom, so many of us these days use books, not just to become knowledgeable but wise. Certain literature teaches us to be wise even though we are unaware of this however not all literature will teach us wisdom.  If I was to read literature on Quantum mechanics, would I then be wise or would I just be more knowledgeable about quantum mechanics?  One must take notice if certain literature is teaching us how to use this knowledge wisely not just telling us about a kind of knowledge.  Man has learnt how to split the atom, has he learnt to use it wisely and constructively?  

Literature doesn’t have to be just a source of knowledge but wisdom. If I read literature on someone else’s actual experiences, am I just learning knowledge or am I learning to be wise as well?  I’m learning to be wise as well because I am actually reading about actual experiences, actual experiences are of wisdom.  Can I gain wisdom only through knowledge?  Yes but only to a degree as it’s someone else’s wisdom and knowledge, not our own.  True wisdom comes about by experiencing what we have learnt ourselves through literature not just copying or mimicking someone else’s wisdom, this doesn’t mean we are not learning to be wise through other people’s experiences but to become truly wise we too need to have actual experiences for our own.

Is literature the only way to learn wisdom?  Like I said, our own experiences teach us wisdom which we have learnt through literature but literature isn’t the only way to gain experiences therefore wisdom.  I should also point out not everything we experience ourselves will give us wisdom, how many people go through life who haven’t learnt from their mistakes?  In this case a wise person would learn from others if they are unable to learn for themselves, this can be obtained through literature, other people who have experienced similar mistakes but have learnt from them.  Literature is handy but it’s not the only way to learn wisdom.

Another way to learn wisdom is by becoming connected to inner self or the universal consciousness, this of course again can be learnt through literature or through actual experiences of becoming connected.  Becoming connected without learning how to do this through literature doesn’t suite everyone, in this case these people are best to learn wisdom through literature, through other people’s experiences. At times this connectedness can automatically occur through trauma of some kind or through just being lucky enough to be connected without effort and without learning such things from literature. Learning wisdom to bring us out of our ignorance and into the light of love comes in many forms for us to learn through, once we have begun to become aware and wise, through whatever means, we have begun to dispel ignorance and what ignorance has created, a controlling ego and a reality of chaos.

Awareness and wisdom quite automatically brings us love and light once we start to wisely use what we know, once in the light out of the darkness of ignorance, love becomes a natural phenomenon without effort.  Awareness and wisdom quite automatically creates a reality of love and light where ignorance quite automatically creates an unwise egotistic existence shrouded in darkness and in turn creating a chaotic reality quite automatically.  There is a lot to be said about love and light for they are of awareness and wisdom, awareness and wisdom instinctively creates love and light…….  

Science/Spirituality as One

Written by Mathew Naismith

I came across a couple of articles that interested me recently on the reasons why science and spirituality belong together as they once were.  I don’t think any singular ideological principle should become dominant of our lives, once this occurs; such ideologies can become destructive as human history quite plainly shows. Separating science and spirituality only gives us dualism (separation) of our thoughts and once this is done both these thoughts become enemies when they were once allies. I hope you enjoy and please log onto these links, in my mind they are worth a read.

A psychological look at science and spirituality: I do find the ideological principles of psychology being far less bias than certain religious and science ideologies; it’s no doubt why I use it so much.  

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/spiritual-wisdom-secular-times/201402/science-and-spirituality-0

Extract: When I was at school, people often asked, “Are you an artist or a scientist?” This was the 1960’s. “Why restrict oneself?” I always thought. “Galileo and Da Vinci were both artists and scientists, so, why not both?” Likewise science and spirituality need not be thought of as separate for, it seems to me, they are also highly compatible. They are complementary, needing each other to make something whole, something bigger than either of them alone. Properly integrated, they permit a level of understanding that amounts to much more than their sum.

To give another example, Apollo 14 astronaut, Edgar Mitchell, returning to earth from the moon in February 1971, “Was filled with an inner conviction as certain as any mathematical equation he’d ever solved. He knew that the beautiful blue world to which he was returning is part of a living system, harmonious and whole – and that we all participate, as he expressed it later, ‘in a universe of consciousness’.”

Both these men of science were deeply affected. Mitchell’s experience too was obviously life-changing because in response, in 1973, he founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences.

The following link will sends you off to a site I think is worth browsing with numerous articles to peruse.  

http://www.dadabhagwan.org/new-visitor/introduction/

Extract: Do any of the following questions arise in your mind?

Is there truly a way to get rid of my anger and worries permanently?

How can I get permanent peace and not just temporary peace that prevails when I meditate?

Besides living a happy and successful life, I also want to realize my true Self, is it possible to attain this?

Is it possible to live a spiritual life without compromising my worldly life?

If yes, then all your problems can be solved through Gnan (True Knowledge).

The darkness of ignorance can be instantly dispelled by the light of true knowledge. True knowledge is result oriented.

By brining science and spirituality together again, we will cease the never ending push and pull effect between science and spirituality thus reducing the chaos in the world quite dramatically.  All ideological principles belong together as one not just science and spirituality for in this will we only obtain true peace and serenity.  It’s quite funny because it’s only in this separateness can chaos exist, once we stop separating these thoughts/ideologies, chaos will no longer exist for it needs separateness to exist, it needs duality.  

Spirituality v Psychology/Science?

Written by Mathew Naismith

We can quite easily judge that spirituality is in opposition to the sciences, even though many of the ancient eastern religions also incorporated science within their religion to one extent or another,  so really spirituality should not be seen as in opposition to the science but it is by many today.  The strange thing is both spirituality and the sciences are about awareness so what’s the problem?

Because I am also into the sciences, like psychology for instance, this to a spiritually aware person seems contradictory for the main reason a psychologist uses the mind to think more not less plus a psychologist has to judge to evaluate. The psychology I am into is to do with analysis not the therapy side of psychology which is all about evaluating and judging, so doesn’t this clash with my spiritual perspectives?

If I was to sit there and judge that I am thinking too much then I would be thinking too much, we need to be careful in how we judge, is it wrong to be spiritually aware and have an interest in the sciences?  To a true spiritually aware person who believes one should not judge a wrong or right there could be no wrong in this even though I am thinking more while using psychology.  The point is it’s not how much we are thinking but how we are thinking!!

Scientist have proven, even under the most deepest meditative states, we still have brain activity but this activity is different to thinking scientifically, when we think scientifically we use the brain differently to being in a meditative state.  It all comes down to how we are using the brain not how much we are using the brain.  Being spiritually aware, am I going to judge thinking too much is wrong? If I did judge this wrong or negative in some way I would be a hypocrite so what is so wrong in thinking period and when do I judge when I am thinking too much?  Actually there is no such thing in thinking too much, especially to a spiritually aware person because they can’t judge accordingly.

The reason my science interests don’t always interfere with my spiritual interests is one, I don’t judge when I’m thinking too much and two, when I judge at times I don’t judge  a right or wrong, if I was to judge a right or wrong then I would  be judgmental  within my opinions which does happen at times.  Being in judgement is only an observation like when a spiritually aware person judges when they or someone else is thinking too much.  Being judgemental on the other hand would be like a spiritually aware person judging a right or wrong of thinking too much.  

To me it comes down to how we think not how much we think but of course to a science minded person they would judgmentally see the lack of thought as being so and so, in other words wrong or negative in some way however to a spiritually aware person thinking too much can be seen as negative or wrong in some way. To me it really doesn’t come down to how much we think but how we think but I suppose I could be wrong!!!!! 

Religion and Science-Controlling Ego

Written by Mathew Naismith

Are the ideological principles of science and religion/spirituality flawed? Well actually no not until you bring in dogmatism, once one becomes dogmatic about any such ideological principles that is when flaws start to appear, not in the principles themselves, but in the people who are expressive of such ideological principles.

When we are dogmatic, what are we expressive of, what human trait does dogmatism rely on to exists, it can’t exist without this particular human trait?  Dogmatism can’t exist without a controlling ego, once the ego takes control of us there is a good chance we will become dogmatic within any ideological principle we take on.

Recently I have been in a discussion with science minded people concerning my last post titled Philosophical Views and the Sciences. The response I got was very typical of anyone arguing on behalf of their own ideological principles they abide by in life, in this case the principles where scientific principles. Science isn’t conductive to dogmas and basically how dare I relate religious mentality with science mentality in this way.  The problem was, the more they argued with me the more dogmatic they sounded which was of course proving my point.

I also showed how corrupt science of today is and how some of these scientists will falsify findings to obtain more funding and prestige.  https://explorable.com/scientific-falsification

I also showed how atheists are just as if not more dogmatic than religious/spiritually aware people.  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/dogmatism-and-openness-experience-in-the-non-religious

Like anyone who has an ideological principle that they see is the be and end all, they will defend these principles to the utter end which is exactly what happened, the discussion is still going on.

I thought I would insert one of my responses to a science minded person about the question religion/spirituality doesn’t give evidence so it’s not credible.

I agree, we form a hypothesis /philosophical view takes inductive reasoning but to formulate a non-conjectural outcome of a hypothesis we use deductive reasoning. 

You said there is no evidence, what is evidence to theorist is different to what is evidence to a realist, if we relied totally on a realists deduction we wouldn’t get anywhere because all theories at first can’t be proven so a realist would disclaim theories from the start because there is no solid proof that a theory is fact.  A good scientist is a theorist and a realist but that is obviously not the case for a lot of science minded people these days.

Now let’s look at evidence again between a realist and an idealist (religion), what one calls evidence isn’t evidence to the other and visa-versa, which one is more correct? Someone who is dogmatic will say their ideological principles are, how often do science minded people proclaim their ideological principles are right over all other principles? Is this any different to religious dogmatisms?  Of course not…..

In a thousand years’ time do you honestly think the present scientific principles used today built solely on logics is still going to be in use? Most science minded people will dogmatically say most defiantly negating how science has evolved in human history so far from philosophy and mysticism. Modern day science will keep evolving unless dogma take it’s toll on such progression, quantum physics is a good example of this in how it will evolve. Quantum physics borders on a kind of mysticism at times which is why other dogmatic science minded people refute any claims made by such sciences. I’ve even had dogmatic science minded people try to tell me psychology isn’t a science and of course I proved them incorrect. 

The controlling factors of the ego have infested science minded peoples scientific principles making their science investigations flawed. This is no different to the Dark Ages when religion was infested by the controlling factors of the ego. I showed how simular Dark Age religion and modern day science is within their mentality, this of course didn’t go down to well mainly because of the controlling effects of the ego. 

Spiritual awareness is about awareness and being aware of the connections between dogmatism and ego in any ideological principle.  Spiritually aware people know, once the ego is no longer in control dogmatism just won’t (can’t) exist and what a shame that would be…….not.(:- 

Awareness of Mental Suppression

Written by Mathew Naismith

Being involved with a number of forum sites & Google communities, allows me to experience a huge cross flow of people and their views. At times these people influence me bringing forth more of what’s in me as I do with them. Recently I came across a lass of the name of Mimi who has once again inspired me.

Mimi Lam

Wow thank you for explaining, for me it was a process of becoming freer and becoming more childlike and spontaneous . I guess we all have different lessons. Have a good day

Me

This is interesting mimi.

In the west women aren't as dominated, they are allowed to be a little more expressive. Freeing yourself from this mentality would bring forth more expressionism; this would have been a huge wow for you.

Freeing ourselves from any suppressive mentality connects us.

Both my parents were highly aggressive, I could write a book titled Guns, knives, brass buckles & soap. The soap seems lame but is was just as deadly.

Once I freed myself from this suppressive mentality I became noticeable connected. Sadly enough not all my siblings became freed from this mentality, one of my brothers is still heavily addicted to drugs to no doubt drown out this suppressive mentality.

Any mental suppression takes us away from being connected; churches & their religions can do this that is why so many people are leaving the church. New age churches are becoming more popular because they are less suppressive.

Spiritually aware people are naturally reacting to mental suppression.

I might write a post about mental suppression.

This is of course why meditation, praying, chanting & so forth work, they release us from various & numerous mental suppressions, no wonder we feel better for this.  Yes we could use drugs, and indeed we do use prescription and illicit drugs to release ourselves from mental suppression, however these have a short term effect plus they also have harmful side effects. The only long term side effect from meditation, praying, chanting & so forth is happiness, contentment & a re-connectedness to our inner selves.  

Without practicing in these or any other spiritual practice, becoming spiritually aware is also of releasing this mental suppression. Going to church, mosques, temples and so forth also work in a similar way so no wonder we turn to spirituality, it’s a suppressant easing the effects of mental suppression.

Thank you Mimi for inspiring me in writing this post, I’ve never directly written about mental suppression & suppressants before, much blessings Mimi.   

Spirituality is for the Suffering

Written by Mathew Naismith

I got a rather abrupt & what I thought was a presumptuous reply from my last post, the quickening of consciousness.  Replies like this from the unfaithful & unaware is expected however when I received this reply I had an urge to right up about this for two reasons. One, presuming that spiritually aware people haven’t been abused or have suffered traumatising injuries is very presumptuous; this is very common from non-believers.  Two, spirituality is about releasing this suffering either it be of personal or collective suffering.

Reply

Try telling this to a woman who's had acid thrown in her face for 'dishonouring' her family. Or a child who's been sexually abused. I'm sure they feel really connected to the 'grid' too. So tired of New Age nonsense.

My reply

I'm one of those abused people you talk about here. Crying over spilt milk isn't going to solve anything, trust me. 

Are you one of these abused people?  What happens to a bloke who has had both he’s legs amputated, he can either give up or he can get on with it. I'm getting on with it.

You picked the wrong person to say this too, it’s sad you have no idea what you are talking about however expected from people who are quite unaware obviously.  

Yes I can see how spiritually aware people who talk about love acceptance all the times can seem to others who have had a rough time of it a little ignorant and delusional, this is to be expected however one should never presume before one knows the truth. There are many people who have found solace in spirituality who have gone through the most horrendous times. Yes, spirituality isn’t for everyone but it is there when needed for a lot of people all over the world.  

I can understand non-believers anger towards people who turn these negative into positives in some way, it does sound delusional and ignorant when we are flying high and others are suffering so but what they don’t realise no one really has to suffer more than they have to.  Non-believers just can’t see how helpful and soothing spirituality can be after any trauma once understood correctly.   

Spirituality-Feeling the Rush

Written by Mathew Naismith

Becoming spiritually aware can be totally electrifying exciting our emotions to emotions that we never thought existed or could never possibly experience in such a reality.  We can feel utter bliss where’s before we felt despair so of course we are going to protect these feelings against anything that remotely threatens such emotions.

What would be the point in becoming spiritually aware through many trials and tribulations to have it squandered away by yet more negativity. At the human level of understanding we are going to avoid this and rightfully so but have you ever asked yourself, “Why are my emotions so electrified?”  Most of us will say it’s because of our newly found awareness but that I feel is only partially so. What if we had always lived with these electrifying emotional feelings, would the effects of such occurrences be as compelling and electrifying?

If we didn’t have such a contrasting reality to these electrifying feelings would these feelings be as electrifying?  I believe divine beings don’t get such a rush as we do as their emotions are more controlled by being consistently in this state of physical omission. It’s the norm for the divine to feel this electrifying ecstasy so until they come in contact with less aware beings this rush doesn’t seem to exist for them in the same way it does for us. What I feel gives them this rush is less aware people’s reaction to such spiritually induced emotions; they can feel our electrifying reactions to these emotions.

The big question is now, who is really divine to whom and is spiritual awareness all about feeling this electrifying ecstasy? I feel it’s all about feeling this electrifying feelings, that is what makes us aware of the light within in the first place, after this it becomes the norm like a lot of actual spiritualists have obtained to one extent or another.  The question is now is, where do these electrifying feelings and this light come from in the first place?

That’s an easy question to answer, from the divine within.

Actual spiritualists don’t get this rush mainly because it’s of the ego unless it has a purpose beyond their desires.  They still feel extremely enlightened but it’s different to the actual rush that a less aware person experiences, it’s very similar to a divine entity as it’s a far more controlled emotion mainly because their emotions aren’t driven by the ego. 

So what is the difference between an enlightened person and a divine entity? 

One still has an issue with the ego and the other hasn’t.  A spiritualist knows the ego is always present; it’s all around them for starters however a divine entity doesn’t have this problem, that is what makes them divine I suppose.  The divine are able to experience and enjoy these emotional rushes through less aware beings without the threat of the ego becoming controlling again. Yes spiritualists can do this but only to a certain extent, they are quite aware they are not divine or should be aware of such things.

This comes back to the question, who is divine to whom, really? Is it what gives the divine these rushes or is it the divine that gives rushes of electrifying emotions to less aware beings? To answer this clearly we should remember these rushes create pure light that is why they are so emotionally electrifying to us.  What gives a light bulb it’s glow, electrifying an element of course, what is above is also below, same principle believe it or not!!

The paradox is, if we didn’t have the divine within we wouldn’t glow however I feel if we didn’t have the lesser aware self the divine wouldn’t glow as it does through lesser aware beings as ourselves.  The divine is the electricity and we are the glow, a balance made in heaven believe it or not as they both serve each other. 

Please don’t take what I have written here as gospel, it’s not.

Spirituality-A Secret Balance

Written by Mathew Naismith

There seems to be, in most, a definable difference between our spiritual self & our human self which is defined by awareness, the more aware we are of the inner and outer workings of life, as a whole, the more our human selves realise we are not being all we are.  The funny thing is though; spirituality is defined by how aware we are which means spirituality is about becoming more aware. This means when we talk about spirituality we are talking about awareness so is this saying the human self is of ignorance?  

Going by actual experiences, there is a huge difference between the human and spiritual self, when we talk about the spiritual in life we are actually talking about awareness which is quite different to human sciences. Human science can only become aware or knowing of what it is consciously aware of but the spiritual self is aware of all of what is. I can understand how science minded people see spirituality as being threatening to their ideological views however the most successful scientists in human history, I believe, are also connected to this spiritual awareness. Many sit within their own quietness which is similar to meditating.  What a scientist is doing when they sit within their own quietness is focusing, people who meditate also focus especially on their breathing. In this case, scientist have balanced out the human self with the aware spiritual self, unbeknownst to most scientists, however the ego wants to take all the credit in being so smart and usually refutes any claim the only reason they are so smart is because of their connectedness to the spiritual aware self.  

This brings us to spiritually aware people themselves, what gives balance to a spiritually aware person? Believe it or not, if spiritually aware people didn’t have this balance between their spiritually aware self and the human self they wouldn’t exist as humans, they would, like the Mayans and many other individuals, physically disappear which brings us back to the question, what balances out a spiritually aware person so they don’t just disappear from this physical world/reality?

Let’s go back to scientists, what balances them out? Believe it or not it’s our ignorance which is egotistically driven; most scientists are ignorant to where there braininess comes from because they want to believe it’s them as individuals who are so aware and knowing.  Of course spiritually aware people know differently mainly because we tend to be not as driven by the ego however I feel if we weren’t driven by ego at all we would disappear.  What I am saying is the ego helps us balance out our spiritual and human self so we don’t change our vibrations to the extent of disappearing.     

The below link shows quite clearly how spirituality and science are in tune with each other and how science minded people just can’t see beyond their egos where’s a lot of spiritually aware people can.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gadadhara-pandit-dasa/hinduism-science-spirituality-intersect_b_967628.html

Extract: Right before the event began, I approached the professor on the panel to say hello. We had met once before, and as I stretched out my hand for a shake I noticed a hesitation on his part in return. Frankly, he didn't look very happy to see me, but I didn't make much of it. During the dialogue and discussion, I noticed he was very aggressive and took every opportunity to belittle all the aspects of spirituality and yoga, of which he had little or no knowledge about in the first place. I realized at that moment that there was a new breed of fanatics on the rise and this breed had nothing to do with religion.

I would also like to add to this by saying; there are a lot of spiritually aware people who clash with science ideologies as well which again denote a controlling ego controlling us to think in certain ways.  When we are thinking in certain ways, either it be spiritually or scientifically, what is driving this thought pattern? Also have some spiritually aware people become highly egotistical when they think of themselves as being more aware especially over and above science minded people?  The link above shows clearly how science and spiritualty are as one however our egos tell us something quite different when we believe in a supposed opposing ideology.  It’s our egos telling us we believe in a much wiser and aware ideological process however being spiritually aware does make us or should make us more aware of this. I don’t believe this is the case with scientists who shut themselves off from the rest of the world to focus on a particular point like spiritually aware people do when meditating.

Anyone with a fixated ideological belief isn’t going to accept this mainly because of the controlling factors of the ego.  

I believe the scientists who have shut themselves off in this way have quite nicely balanced out the spiritual & human self, mostly unbeknownst to them,  probably a lot better than most spiritually aware people can. This is because a lot of spiritually aware people are only focused and believe in spiritual awareness and denounce anything else beyond this thought process. This thought process is obviously controlled by the ego denoting,” my ideological beliefs are far superior to science ideologies”.  It takes a wise spiritually aware person to become aware enough to know it’s all about awareness no matter how that awareness has been obtained.  Yes science has proven itself unworthy at times but so has spirituality, when this happens, where is this awareness?

It is funny to think the ego is keeping us balanced between our spiritual and human selves unless we are unwise. It is obvious the ego has gone troppo in this reality either it be scientifically/technologically driven or spiritually/religiously driven however where there is a balance between our human and spiritual selves the controlling factors of the ego are far less controlling which in turn gives us balance. According to a number of spiritually aware people we should rid ourselves of the ego all together; I believe there is no balance in this between our human and spiritual selves. If we want to end up like the Mayans fair enough but most of us don’t see any point to this. I believe there is a reason we are here and it’s not to just disappear but find a balance between the human and spiritual self or if you like, the ego and spiritual self.  Once we find this balance collectively, what we know what heaven to be will seem lame.  

Cannibalism and Spirituality

Written by Mathew Naismith

Note: Its' not surprising this post didn't go down well, it's extremely difficult to humanly see ourselves as cannibals, we want to think the most of ourselves not less of ourselves.  However spirituality to me is about honesty & acceptance, it's not about our stature or ego. Seeing ourselves & everything else as equal even to the most seemingly lowliest creature is all about oneness with all to me. Seeing ourselves as cannibals feeding on consciousness or ourselves isn't to me derogative to our true selves but of course if we only see ourselves as physical beings, seeing ourselves as cannibals in anyway will seem derogative.  

The funny thing about seeing ourselves as cannibals through the interconnectedness of consciousness is it’s natural for without this interaction of fragmented consciousness we will always stay fragmented. The only thing we are doing when we are feeding on consciousness is changing the energy flow or vibration of consciousness; it’s not like cannibalising in physical form. We have been feeding off of consciousness through the controlling factors of the ego, if we could learn to feed from this consciousness without the controlling ego ruling our actions and thoughts life could be quite different in this reality.  The question is, do we keep feeding on consciousness through the controlling ego or do we change the way we feed off of consciousness?   Yes our ego doesn't want us to know we are cannibals but for real positive change to occur we must drop the controlling factors of the ego and accept we are all cannibals in a sense feeding off of consciousness.       

This is going to be a funny post to write up mainly because spirituality has a habit in making us more aware only if we are open minded.  Part of this is becoming aware of consciousness itself, knowing that everything is consciousness, so what has this to do with cannibalism? Everything around us, including ourselves, is consciousness formed into different forms, this of course brings us to cannibalism for the main reason we consume different conscious energy forms.  "When we consume different forms of energy this can’t be cannibalism because were not consuming our own form, cannibalism only refers to consuming the same form!!"

If we are talking about our physicality, it is obvious most of us aren’t cannibals but when we talk about the non-physical attributes of consciousness and of consciousness just being of consciousness, we are all cannibals because we consume conscious energy to gain energy.  This is very hard for the human mind to accept because the mind can only see fragmented consciousness in it’s separated forms however when we look at this in a more holistic way all we see is consciousness consuming consciousness. Once we stop separating everything within it’s different forms and look at everything in a holistic way we do indeed all take part in cannibalism. This of course isn’t referring to actual physical cannibalism mainly because we are not consuming a similar physical energy source as ourselves however when we see everything as just conscious energy we are cannibals.

Cannibalism conducted in this way isn’t derogative mainly because it’s not seen that we are consuming another physical form but a non-physical energy source. When we look at everything as a non-physical conscious source of energy, we then have no fragmentation of consciousness; we have stopped labelling everything and putting these labels within their chosen slots. For example, instead of seeing a carrot as being a carrot before we consume it we now see it as just another conscious energy source as we are. Physically, genetically, biologically and organically there is an obvious difference between ourselves and a carrot however seeing a carrot as just another conscious energy source there’s no difference between ourselves and a carrot.  Like I said previously, this is very hard for the/a logical mind to comprehend mainly because the logical mind is fixated on physicality however when we become unfixed to this kind of logics the mind becomes somewhat more open minded. You could ask why would anyone want to become as open minded as me, I must be wacko or delusional to even look at all of life like this!! However is it whacko to look outside the box of fixated ideologies?

Getting back to it, everything we consume and everything we excrete /defecate is a conscious energy source however when we consume such an energy source we physically change this consumed energy into another energy source. This is something else the average logical mind can’t comprehend; everything is energy/consciousness no matter how we change it. Most of us look at human excrement as being waste, we can’t see it’s still an energy source, yes it’s somewhat changed from when we consumed it but it’s still an energy source or consciousness.  The problem to why we can only see waste, either it being toxic or not, as waste and no longer an energy source is because we have labelled it waste and once we label it as being waste we no longer see it as an energy source or consciousness.  No matter how we change consciousness it is still consciousness for the main reason all we are doing is changing the physical attributes of consciousness not consciousness itself.  This is why some of us say this reality is an illusion, consciousness has become fragmented to give us physical form, consciousness is no longer seen as what it truly is, I however see it as not being all we are.

Consciousness is whatever form it takes and in all of the forms it takes, the problem with realities like this one we think physical consciousness is all what consciousness is.  I predict one day we won’t have a waste problem because we will begin to see, through our heightened awareness, that everything is a conscious energy source. How, in just knowing this, is this going to change waste into a more viable usable energy source?  Once we realise that everything is a conscious energy source no matter how we physically change it, we will be able to see everything as vibrations and all vibrations can be changed by using other vibrations to change the frequencies within other vibrations. Shamans, witch doctors and all other healers alike have always used vibrations to change the vibratory pattern or signature of other vibrations within the body. Herbs, potions, chanting and praying are all conscious energy sources vibrating at their own frequencies. 

Using a herb or chanting for example is cannibalising because we are changing/consuming an energy source like ourselves, it’s all, after all, just pure consciousness at the core of everything in existence.   

I would also like to add, it’s funny how so many people think that I think too much on matters like this, it has been said on numerous occasions that I must have conducted a lot of research prior to writing my findings down. Very little of what I write is actually researched or thought of much at all before writing them down, most of what I write about on this blog just comes to me as I’m writing.  

Spirituality Changing Things for the Betterment of All

Written by Mathew Naismith

Sorry but this is going to be a lengthier post than usual. When we talk about how spirituality/religion has always supposed to have been all about changing our vibrations for the betterment of all mankind, it was always going to become a lengthy topic to discuss.  

Spirituality/religion to me is supposed to be about the betterment of all mankind, this is done by changing & replacing destructive vibrations with constructive vibrations but of course that hasn’t always occurred especially in the western minded countries.  Consciousness, which everything in existence I feel was created from, is a formulation of vibrative energy sources. Our mass, or human form, is made up out of different vibrations vibrating at different frequencies which is all what consciousness itself is.  This is where spirituality is supposed to be about, positive changes & within these positive changes we are supposed to be changing or manipulating vibrations/consciousness to serve ourselves instead of hurting ourselves.

Pure consciousness is like living under the influence of one story like consumerist materialism mainly because it’s vibrating in tune with itself, this is what we call oneness. Once we bring in time however this fragments this consciousness into different frequencies & when these frequencies interact with each other in time they create form/mass or other non-physical energy sources. Some of these energy sources, like humans, can create other energy forms & sources & so on. All what everything is, is energy sources & forms created from the interactions of various & numerous vibrating frequencies. We see a rock for instance as not being conscious but it is because it’s made up out of consciousness, it’s just not conscious like we are mainly because we are made up out of a lot more various vibrating frequencies than a rock for instance.  

Spirituality gives us this awareness to change this fragmented consciousness in time to serve all, various ancient religious texts often refer to spirituality serving all of mankind however we seemed to have strayed from this I feel in a lot of ways.

The following is an exchange I had with a bloke called Jeff on my last post titled Vibrations Alive. You might however find some of our discussion a little far fetch, try to keep an open mind if you could.  

@ Mathew

Here's my Amazon review of a book about Edgar Cayce and vibrations.

I gave the book 5 stars out of 5.

Edgar Cayce on Vibrations: Spirit in Motion

[Paperback]

by Kevin J. Todeschi  (Author) , Edgar Cayce (Author)

43 of 48 people found the following review helpful

Great Book By A Cayce Expert

This book follows a good pattern for writing books about Edgar Cayce.

It includes material from Cayce's psychic readings, explains this material, and shows how people acted on this information and what the results were. I like most books about Cayce that follow this simple formula.

Cayce said people, places, even entire countries all have an energy. For example Rochester, NY has a different energy than Chicago. Go into a church and feel that energy. Then go into a prison and you will feel a very different sort of energy. Interesting too is that the different planets have different energies and when we are in the spirit world we can somehow experience those other dimensions. For example the planet Neptune is symbolic of mystical forces as is the god Poseidon I think.

Some people have a positive sort of energy that can heal and calm others. How fortunate we will be if we meet those people. There's a chapter about some electronic devices that Cayce designed to help with the flow of energy through the body. This reminded me of a past life memory from the book 'Same Soul Many Bodies' by Brian Weiss. This guy said as a priest in very ancient Egypt he used 'energy rods' which generated both light and sound to stimulate the body's own regenerative powers. They could for example cause the body to regenerate an arm that had been lost in warfare.

There have been some very interesting stories on the news recently which indicate we may be on the verge of rediscovering this ancient knowledge and we will soon be able to unlock the body's unimaginable regenerative powers. In fact this is already being done using a 'magic powder' that is made from pig bladders.

There are many fascinating insights by and about Cayce in this book.

Meditation Music of Ancient Egypt

Fulcanelli: Master Alchemist: Le Mystere des Cathedrales, Esoteric Intrepretation of the Hermetic Symbols of The Great Work (Le Mystere Des Cathedrales ... of the Hermetic Symbols of Great Work)

Crystal Therapy: How to Heal and Empower Your Life with Crystal Energy

Edgar Cayce's Egypt: Psychic Revelations on the Most Fascinating Civilization Ever Known

Same Soul, Many Bodies: Discover the Healing Power of Future Lives through Progression Therapy

Initiation by Elizabeth Haich.

The Mystery of the Crystal Skulls: Unlocking the Secrets of the Past, Present, and Future

@ Jeff

Again Jeff thanks for the insights.

Everything & everyone looks different for a reason & that reason is we vibrate at different frequencies, sometimes for a very good reason. 

I go along with everything you have said here.  

@ Mathew

Isn't string theory related to vibrations somehow ?

I don't know since I'm no scientist that's for sure. I wish I could comprehend some of that stuff better.

@ Jeff

Yes I believe so, string theory is a complicated formulation with protons, neurons & so forth interacting with each other to form mass/form/larger energy sources.

Vibrations is a simplified version of this. We have vibrations which are made up of various & numerous frequencies interacting with each other to form mass/form/larger energy sources.

What I feel gives form to a  human hand for instance is various vibrations but within each vibration that gives a hand form we have numerous frequencies that make up these vibrations. Actually it is complicated if we delve right into it but we don't have to unlike the string theory. 

This is why I agree with you when you said about the they could for example cause the body to regenerate an arm that had been lost in warfare.

I 'm just wondering how many of my posts are attributed to my life lived in ancient Egyptian!! Why are you so in tuned with this stuff??    

I use to be really concerned about our pollutive ways but one day, if we survive that is, I believe we will be able to transform all waste, toxic or not, into another usable form/energy source.

Once energy always energy, all we need to do is become aware of how we can manipulate this energy to serve us instead of hurting us.   

Being More Positively Expressive on the Net

Written by Mathew Naismith

Note: I was asked a couple of questions in relation to the quote, I will insert this at the end of the post in bold.  

Hopefully the following might help a few people deal with others that are more about control when trying to converse with others on the net.  It’s fine avoiding these people but spiritual awareness isn’t just about our own awareness but the awareness of all collectively I believe which means at times we may have to deal with controllers when conversing with others.  Spirituality to me isn’t about taking control but releasing it. Recently I became involved with a spiritual site that was all about knowledge & knowledge on it’s own is all about control because anything I put on this site about wisdom was quite destructively ridiculed.  Is this sites concepts wrong in some way? No because it’s like any belief or view others abide by, it’s each to their own, this site just wasn’t for me so I found out.

On this site I experienced quite a lot of high cap replies which denotes yelling & aggression which would explain the destructive criticism I was receiving from these people. High caps are fine if we are trying to point out a particular point however we should beware that we could be displaying an aggressive stance & even if we weren’t others might take it this way.  This is a good thing to remember when conversing with anyone on the net.  There is also a big difference between constructive & destructive criticism, the links below give a good outline of the difference of constructive & destructive criticism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varieties_of_criticism

Extract:  Destructive criticism aims to destroy the target of criticism, by making the destructive criticism (e.g. "you should shut up and follow the program"). The aim is to show that the point of view of someone else has no validity at all, or lacks any merit.

Constructive criticism aims to show that the intent or purpose of something is better served by an alternative approach. In this case, making the criticism is not necessarily deemed wrong, and its purpose is respected; rather, it is claimed that the same goal could be better achieved via a different route. Constructive criticisms are often suggestions for improvement – how things could be done better or more acceptably. They draw attention to how an identified problem could be solved, or how it could be solved better.

We can deduct here that constructive criticism is more of awareness but destructive criticism is of control.

The link below gives some very helpful hints in being more constructive in our replies. We can also see from this when others are being destructive within their criticism which at times is hard to detect. The following info will also help with this by allowing us to detect sooner if a person is being constructive or destructive within their criticism. This will help us determine if the discussion is worth going on with before it gets totally out of hand.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/think-well/201110/the-art-constructive-criticism

Extract: Most people are very thin-skinned and easily upset when it comes to receiving criticism.

Even when criticism is constructively intended, the receiver may be sensitive and respond with feelings of anger, sadness, or guilt, especially when the criticism is delivered in a way that tends to arouse defensiveness such as sending it in the form of a "You-message." (See "I-Statements" below.)

This is because when people receive messages that start with "You," such as "You didn't do this," "You never do that," "You always do the following," it is natural for them to feel attacked and take a defensive or even a retaliative position.

Fortunately, there are several excellent methods for giving constructive criticism that are unlikely to trigger bad feelings.

If we incorporate the word you with high cap letters this will enhance the effectiveness of destructive criticism used. We should also remember here some people converse in this way deliberately, spammers are a good example of this.  

I hope this will assist anyone wanting to express their own free thinking & awareness to others on the net, hoping they just might help others become more aware. Spiritual awareness is about the awareness of the collective not just of the individual so feel free to express yourself more confidently.  Now get out there & express yourself away.

+Deb Putman I wasn't always positive either Deb.

Is there a reason why we attract negative people & responses? A very good question & should we feel obligated to help? Just by being positive is helping even though they feel threatened by this positivity.

A positive person attracting a negative person is a positive sign from the negative person because they feel threatened for some reason so a question mark goes up. Once they feel threatened something is telling them there is something wrong here but of course it's usually the positive person who is in the wrong according to them & they will pull out all stops to prove so.

The conscious self is telling them someone else is at fault but the subconscious self is telling them wait a minute I'm at fault. When I get a seemingly negative response from a negative person it's really a positive response because they have just become aware of a difference. It's a start & that is all we need to do because the subconscious usually does the rest but of course that isn’t always the case.

There is an old saying that goes like this,"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink"..