Re: DSM: We like minded people 2


Robert Swanson (robertswanson@icehouse.net)
Sun, 05 Nov 2000 01:45:49 -0800


Dana & all,

I am delighted to have your reply.

Yes. There is something here to strike a chord. I'm not sure what can be
understood except that there is a problem to be better discerned. How does
one lizard explain to another, "If you jump off this cliff over here you
will evolve into a falcon"? And lizards have no idea what a falcon is. As
much as I like to rant about jumping, I don't know how fast I'd take the
leap myself.

Yes. We are conditioned. Actually I did take a leap about thirteen years
ago. It was from ignorance and conditioning to "Oh S___!" and conditioning.
I chose a counselor to be my mentor-teacher for a few years (actually, she
still is) after breaking with a girl friend. I thought, "Suicide or
counseling? Hmm, counseling seems really stupid and the bigger risk..."
There was something about daring myself; I chose the counselor. It was
really bad. She asked me how I felt. Gosh, what nonsense, besides, I wasn't
feeling anything; I just wanted to either kill myself or kill the girl
friend. This stupid counselor couldn't understand, No Feelings, I Don't
Feel!! And then she wanted other insanity, such as, eye contact, holding
hands, I-statements (taking responsibility), openness, and congruency of
tone, words and feeling. She even had the gull to suggest I repeat our
session work out in the world. Geez! Every bit of it was so contrary to real
life!

There are no external stimuli to mind. Yet, since projection is mentored
from deluded minds, the "receiver" of the mentoring accepts the delusion and
the projection. Actually, what is being learned is focus of attention on
intellect. Intellect is capable of fathoming ideas dissociated from feeling
and environment. This can be quite useful directed from higher thought, but
the lower lizard-like brain makes it a dangerous toy of a selfish ego in
behalf of fear. It cannot be honest because it does not have its own
thoughts or feelings to be honest from. Seem ridiculous? It is, but go take
a class in Nonviolent Communication and find out how hard it is to be
sincere. On a tape I just listened to, a room full of teachers were asked to
make even one non-projected feeling statement. Not one could. All were
totally baffled. Right, honesty is scarce. Now that I know how to listen for
honesty I am aware that it almost never happens. And what happens when an
honest person does speak sincerely, congruently, about the right-now?
Intellect flips out. Conditioning has crucified intelligence for just about
all of us.

Can the insanity be thrown off? Well, this means opening the heart up as the
governing influence. I have not found a guru to do that with me. Second in
line for my search is one other person to be honest with. This means:
letting down the guards. Objectively watching from within to say congruently
what emotions are giving to the current time and relationship in terms of
insights, memories, desires, defensive thoughts, fears and joys. Discern
intent and move energy up. Allow laughter, tears, play and intuition. Allow
no guardedness or silent intent. Respond to accelerated possibility, never
to hide again. When it looks like death's door, jump in, with eyes wide
open. What a thrilling enthralling ride! What a difference having a heart!

No. Children cannot forge their own path any more than an infant left in the
woods will learn to fly an airplane. The mind is extent possibility. This
openness needs mentors that this mind might arrive on planet earth. That
other people exists is a matter of open hearts. For this to occur the infant
is held to heart and remains there much of the time until its weight is a
burden. By then bonding should be a firm connection, a closeness that is
also enhanced intelligence. Literally, heart to heart contact accelerates
intelligence and lessons violent tendencies. After this the child needs gobs
of exposure to the variety that will be life later (not as fear but as
interest). How this exposure is exemplified by other's presence is extremely
important, quite as if the child IS those other people. The child learns not
just the spoken language but unspoken languages as well. How about the
language of honor, of joy, of spiritual awareness, of observation, of
adaptation, of reason, of empathy, of organization and triage. After four
years let the child take these tools and explore, apply, unafraid, with joy.
At seven years the child is ready for exposure to all possibility, as much
as the world's imagination can provide through experience. At eleven the
child is given as much conceptual experience (experience, not talked at) as
can be presented with and to enthusiasm. At puberty, sexuality is as simply
experienced as other joyful explorations. Through fifteen there is focus on
adaptation with quality, as a life force in society. At sixteen the cerebrum
opens and discovery takes on whole new dimensions as creative genius. As
parents, creative genius easily finds the heart connection and brings forth
a child potentiated beyond its parent's abilities.

Does the child need mentors? Oh, yes. Is the child set free? As genius
creativity... yes indeed. Is all this meaningful? Beyond anything our
intellect-in-a-box has imagined.

Have I said more that I know? Oh yes, way more. But would you rather gamble
on passivity and intellect? I for one am not going to devolve to what I was
before the counseling.

robert

on 11/4/00 11:21 PM, Dana Bennis at dbennis@umich.edu wrote:

> Robert,
>
>
> I have spent a great deal of time reading the emails of the past few days,
> and it has been difficult to fully comprehend them. I am still unsure to
> what extent I understand what you, Joe, and others are saying . . . but
> something about the discussion has struck a chord (or is it "cord"?) with
> me.
>
> Robert, are you saying that influences from society condition us to do
> certain things and become certain people, and that therefore we can not be
> truly honest, but only can display false honesty? So that we think we are
> being honest to ourselves yet in actuality we are only responding to
> external influence or stimuli. If so (or if not I guess!) I
> wholeheartedly agree. To me it seems that the importance of this
> statement is momentous. It recognizes the powerful conditioning influence
> of society . . . And it would be wonderful if people could throw off or
> even never let in this influence, and instead be truly honest to oneself.
> If this is possible, then people would be able to follow their self and
> their heart - forging their individual paths and not following in the paths
> that have already been created and traveled on. (please disregard that
> hanging preposition if it bothers you!)
>
> I am not certain to what extent you were saying that, but those are some of
> my thoughts.
>
> Could it be possible to ensure that children would forge their own path and
> not follow another's? How? And very importantly, would that be denying
> the children their freedom to choose what to do, be it follow society (even
> though that might not be a conscious choice) or follow their own self, OR
> would it not be infringing upon their freedom and instead allowing them to
> be free to be true to their own self?
>
>
> These thoughts are certainly for anyone to make a response.
>
> Thanks,
> Dana Bennis
>
> (and Robert, I loved your last email about loving to be with children as
> they are mentors for you. . . I feel the same way as you).
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Nov 06 2000 - 09:05:37 EST