Wholeness and Fragmentation

[Nick_A]

DaM

Unfortunately we were attacked by experts so the theme of the thread has been changed to better suit the experts. But I appreciated the sincerity of your last post and my reply is so far back you may think you were ignored. Not so. I copied it here where you can find it

by Nick_A » Fri May 22, 2020 4:28 pm

DaM

Nick_A wrote: ↑
Thu May 21, 2020 7:57 pm
The purpose of life for me as a mini universe as opposed to dog is its potential for conscious evolution.

Consciously evolve into what though? That's the bit that's puzzles me Nick

What is “being?” You believe that existence is the result of an ever changing dualism of a dream. It doesn’t require laws but only the will and the need of God for some reason to dream. Consider these three statements:

The notion "being" is the philosopohic notion that denotes: 1) something that is existing, 2) the totality of really existing things, the existing reality. "Non-being" is the other philosophic notion that denotes: 1) absence of something, 2) all things non-existent in reality, non-existent reality.

Heidegger went on to say, “ 'Being-in' is thus the formal existential expression for the Being of Dasein, which has its Being-in-the-world as its essential state.” According to Steiner (1978), “Heidegger is saying that the notion of existential identity and that of world are completely wedded.

The Great Chain of Being is a hierarchical structure of all matter and life, thought in medieval Christianity to have been decreed by God. The chain starts with God and progresses downward to angels, humans, animals, plants, and minerals.
If being is relative, can a human being lawfully evolve from animal man as a creature of reaction into conscious Man capable of human will? Is it lawfully possible for the essence of a mineral to evolve into the essence of a plant? If it is, is it lawfully possible that animal Man as a creature of reaction can evolve into a conscious being capable of conscious action?

First of all people do not agree on what being is. Does it refer to existence and non existence, confined to the world, or a universal description of the levels of being which define our universe? Do laws sustain being or does dreaming make laws unnecessary? These questions are worth pondering but look what happens when people ponder politicallly incorrect ideas. You and I may disagree but does that mean we must act like raving lunatics especially when we disagree on something so essential for the human essence as “meaning?” can we respectfully disagree? But how can we do it?

“To think about God is to the human soul what breathing is to the human body.

I say to think about God, not necessarily to believe in God–that may or may not come later.

I say: to think about God.” ~Jacob Needleman in What Is God? p. 3 mm


For God or against God, “belief” or “atheism,” it makes no difference unless the inner yearning— or whatever we wish to call the cause and source of the “second breathing” — is there. And it can so easily be there, just as it can so easily be covered over and ignored, perhaps for the rest of one’s life. God or not God, “belief” or “science” — it also makes no real difference for my personal life unless the call of the Self and its need to “breathe” is heard and, ultimately, respected. Not only can thought about ultimate reality make no difference to the world or to my personal life unless we hear and respect the call of the Self, but such empty thought can bring down our personal and collective world, even our Earth itself. When thought races ahead of Being, a civilization is racing toward destruction.

Jacob Needleman: What Is God?

It is obvious that in the real world and in the cyber world there is a powerful effort to corrupt this second breathing through ridicule. I hope you’ve seen that even though we disagree I haven’t taken this attitude which attacks something as essential to freely ponder as “meaning”

[Dontaskme]

The purpose of life for me as a mini universe as opposed to dog is its potential for conscious evolution.

DAM wrote: Consciously evolve into what though? That's the bit that's puzzles me Nick

What is “being?” You believe that existence is the result of an ever changing dualism of a dream. It doesn’t require laws but only the will and the need of God for some reason to dream.

For me, part of the dream is the dynamic of cause and effect, so of course there are laws within the dream, they are called dream laws, which could be interpreted as being mindful of one actions as having consequential results.

Within the dream of separation, God aka no-thing aka everything is always and ever all allowing for every action, because it's totally unbounded and free to do so. For there is no action without a reaction, and vice versa, and yet every action is nought but a unitary action ..why? because reality has no begining nor end, it's a seamless linear flow, in constant flux from source to source.

Consider these three statements:

The notion "being" is the philosopohic notion that denotes: 1) something that is existing, 2) the totality of really existing things, the existing reality. "Non-being" is the other philosophic notion that denotes: 1) absence of something, 2) all things non-existent in reality, non-existent reality.

Heidegger went on to say, “ 'Being-in' is thus the formal existential expression for the Being of Dasein, which has its Being-in-the-world as its essential state.” According to Steiner (1978), “Heidegger is saying that the notion of existential identity and that of world are completely wedded.

The Great Chain of Being is a hierarchical structure of all matter and life, thought in medieval Christianity to have been decreed by God. The chain starts with God and progresses downward to angels, humans, animals, plants, and minerals.

If being is relative, can a human being lawfully evolve from animal man as a creature of reaction into conscious Man capable of human will?


Is it lawfully possible for the essence of a mineral to evolve into the essence of a plant?

I cannot know that Nick. I'm not sure because minerals and plants co-exist side by side together as two separate conceptual known things, so I don't really know what you are asking me.

If it is, is it lawfully possible that animal Man as a creature of reaction can evolve into a conscious being capable of conscious action?

Man, which is consciousness knowing itself as and through that character, can be consciously aware of ''otherness'' because through this human brain mechanism, it evolved language, the human brain got bigger and more complicated, it split the consciousness into two, consciousness and the conscious awareness of the objects within it. Although, the objects are only conceptual KNOWNS already couched within consciousness. So for the consciousness expressing itself as and through the body of a human then yes, there is the potential for conscious action. But so what Nick? ...there's nothing that is more special or superior about this character over and above any other creature. The consciousness that expresses itself as and through the Human character developed a language, they also evolved thumbs, and so evolved to be co- creative, and civilized, but the way I see it Nick, is that this human expression is just one of a multitude of other dreams, and that everything is appearing to itself as a dream within a dream...as and when that dream is known and experienced.

I don't believe there is anymore to it than that, we're no more special than say a dolphin is for example, I've heard dolphins have extraordinary intelligence that far supercedes human intelligence, but that's not for the consciousness expressing itself as a human to experience, because we're not a dolphin. Only consciousness would know what dolphin consciousness is like to experience.

The human dream evolved an innate capacity to form language, resulting in our knowledge, which became the catalyst that separated humans from the other animals, it was almost like evolution was just heading toward that kind of evolution that desired to co-create and develop a self centred awareness...known as the split consciousnes...aka the mindful awareness of ''otherness'' ..which is conceptually known as having a SELF...and yet in reality, there is no- other thing that has a SELF....there is ONLY SELF

So what I mean by ''otherness'' is when (not-a-thing awareness) became aware it was awareness... this realisation manifests as the dual nature of awarensss/consciousness/mind...which was born of language/knowledge.

Sorry this seems to take so much data to explain what I am trying to say..Nick. I don't even know how to explain what I am trying to explain, I just write what I think needs to be written as best I can explain things, I don't even know if what I'm saying makes any sense to anyone else reading it, however, it does always make perfect sense to me...because I'm seeing through the lens of my own perception of the God of my own understanding, and all I can do is share that with you, the way I'm seeing it...as does everyone else do the same from their lens of perception...and so even as we each understand things from our own unique perspectives....for me, it's all the same one expressing itself in myriads of different ways. The many of the ONE

.

[Dontaskme]

It is obvious that in the real world and in the cyber world there is a powerful effort to corrupt this second breathing through ridicule. I hope you’ve seen that even though we disagree I haven’t taken this attitude which attacks something as essential to freely ponder as “meaning”

I understand and resonate with what Jacob Needleman is saying. And I also understand what you are saying Nick, although I do not necessarily always agree with what you are saying. . partially due to the way in which it is delivered.

But for me, yes there does appear to be a rejection of the second breathing. Why, because the 'ego character' desires to take the centre stage...it wants to play God, even though it's really crap at playing God, and God knows this, but allows for the ego play anyway, because God who is No thing and Everything already knows this 'ego character' so well, because it's all God anyway....read the following explanation that I found on the internet...it explains why the ego fights with other egos..namely itself.


_______________



''Edging God Out (EGO)

Ego. We all have it. At the end of the day, we all want to know that we are loved and appreciated, that our lives are of worth. And that’s not so bad.

The problem comes when we turn to the wrong sources to find our lasting value.


We “Edge God Out” when we move Him from His rightful place as our:

Object of worship,
Source of self-worth, security, and wisdom, and
Audience and Authority over our daily work and life story.
Any person or thing that we allow to take God’s place will leave us anything but satisfied with where we stand. They are poor counterfeits for the One who truly gives life meaning.

“Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ.” Galatians 1:10

Edging God Out leads to:

Separation: We’ll isolate ourselves from God and from others.
Comparison: We will never be good enough, strong enough, or talented enough.
Distortion: The truth will be replaced with a false sense of security or fear.


In short, the approval (or disapproval) of any audience other than God will only leave us feeling empty.

Exalting God Only

On the other hand, we can experience extraordinary freedom and self-worth when we remember Whose we are and who we are. We are beloved creations of God the Father – and nothing we do can make Him love us more or less. Our value is found in Him alone.

“For the Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.” (1 Samuel 16:7b)
We “Exalt God Only” when we venerate Him as our:

Object of worship,
Source of security, self-worth, and wisdom, and
The Audience and Judge of our life decisions.
In doing so, our pride and fear is replaced with humility and God-grounded confidence. We experience:

Community with God and others,
Contentment in all circumstances, and
Truth, which will set us free.
God’s Stage


Unlike local theatre, there is a part for everyone on God’s stage. You were created with a distinct temperament and set of skills. You have experiences unlike anyone else’s and a circle of influence that is uniquely yours.

I can’t play your part. And you can’t play mine. Thank God for that!

What’s more, there as the Audience stands the great and loving Director, and He is eager to applaud your performance. So step to center stage, and give it your all with confidence. You were born to play this part!

Exalting God only brings true joy and purpose. With His guidance and approval, you are sure to wow all those who experience the masterpiece to which He has called you.''


.

[Dontaskme]

You and I may disagree but does that mean we must act like raving lunatics especially when we disagree on something so essential for the human essence as “meaning?” can we respectfully disagree? But how can we do it?

This is the most important question you've ever raised here Nick. Because it's essential that in order to rise above the confusion of God verses Ego's...there has to come a realisation within all egos that within the realm of duality, aka mind activity, there are only egos communicating with other egos, and that they all want to be heard, and can only express themselves from their limited knowledge and experience according to where they are along the path of their awakening - exiting from the dream of separation, and back in through the entrance of their real, and true authentic nondual self.

Egos always want to shine the brightest. Even if that means being rude and obnoxiously dominant. Some egos however already know that they are not the original source of their shine, no more than the moon can generate it's own light, the moonlight comes from a source beyond itself.

And that's what the ego has to realise, that it's light is not it's own light, it's light is originating from beyond it's limited capacity to shine.

When I refer to the concept of ''BEYOND''.... I'm NOT talking about a place out or reach, I'm talking about who you are in essence right here and now ALWAYS...

''That which lies beyond the ego is consciousness – the Self.”

“The mind is a bundle of thoughts. The thoughts arise because there is the thinker.''



When egos are acting like raving lunatics with other egos, all they are doing is battling with unwanted concepts, all of which are completely empty, believed to be real. For your real essence is the pure emptiness in which all these concepts arise and are known on contact.

In essence your real self does not come, it does not go, it is the constant pure empty awareness of all comings and goings. Empty and Full. Empty fullness..

.

[Dontaskme]

DaM

Unfortunately we were attacked by experts so the theme of the thread has been changed to better suit the experts. But I appreciated the sincerity of your last post and my reply is so far back you may think you were ignored. Not so. I copied it here where you can find it

OK Nick, I gotcha and thanks.

I see attacks as like boxing with shadows. It's tedious, pointless, goes nowhere, and just basically bores me to death being in that arena, I'd rather just concentrate on being constantly in the limelight (pardon the pun )

.

[Nick_A]

DaM

Within the dream of separation, God aka no-thing aka everything is always and ever all allowing for every action, because it's totally unbounded and free to do so. For there is no action without a reaction, and vice versa, and yet every action is nought but a unitary action ..why? because reality has no begining nor end, it's a seamless linear flow, in constant flux from source to source.

As I see it the universe is cyclical. It is the breath of God. So for me it is a seamless vertical flow. The great chain of being is a vertical measure of living vibrations within creation

I cannot know that Nick. I'm not sure because minerals and plants co-exist side by side together as two separate conceptual known things, so I don't really know what you are asking me.

They exist side by side in the world but their being is different. The essence of minerals are in plants. Plants are minerals plus the vibratory frequency which defines the being of plants. I recognize a vertical relationship you see as linear.

Man, which is consciousness knowing itself as and through that character, can be consciously aware of ''otherness'' because through this human brain mechanism, it evolved language, the human brain got bigger and more complicated, it split the consciousness into two, consciousness and the conscious awareness of the objects within it. Although, the objects are only conceptual KNOWNS already couched within consciousness. So for the consciousness expressing itself as and through the body of a human then yes, there is the potential for conscious action. But so what Nick? ...there's nothing that is more special or superior about this character over and above any other creature. The consciousness that expresses itself as and through the Human character developed a language, they also evolved thumbs, and so evolved to be co- creative, and civilized, but the way I see it Nick, is that this human expression is just one of a multitude of other dreams, and that everything is appearing to itself as a dream within a dream...as and when that dream is known and experienced.

I agree. There is a difference between consciousness and qualities of consciousness we express in language. Here we enter the question which will kick people out of secular sites. “ there is the potential for conscious action. But so what Nick? ...there's nothing that is more special or superior about this character over and above any other creature.”

Animal life serves its purpose. It lives and dies serving this purpose of transforming substances and their vibrations culminating in dust to dust. Animal man is a necessity serving the same function. The traditional ways suggest Man’s being is relative. He is three in one. The lower parts are animal while the higher parts are conscious. They are united in imagination rather than consciousness because our lower parts are out of balance. Plato’s chariot analogy describes our situation. The white horse on the right works as it should but the dark horse on our left has become corrupted. The driver living in imagination cannot unite them and the dark horse rules the driver and pulls it down to the earth. It is the human condition

Human purpose is to become the conscious driver awakening the dark horse to become normal. Where Nietzsche wrote of the will to power, Plato wrote of consciousness and the will to become human.

Imagine you are a conscious being in the world with the purpose of awakening humanity living in imagination to what it has been taught to hate. You wll be killed but living a conscious death and all the ugliness that animal Man is capble of and experiencing it for what it is; the quick way of inviting what is necessary to evolve from animal man into the being of conscious Man. But who can experience a conscious death when even if someone on the street looks at you the wrong way, consciousness vanishes. Can we become conscious and capable of uniting wholeness and fragmentation into a conscious whole in which Man serves a universal purpose?

[surreptitious57]

Existence is the only absolute state that actually is because a state of non existence is simply not possible
Everything within Existence is a part of it and the combination of all those parts is the whole of Existence

Existence is always present but it is also in an eternal state of change and we are a tiny infinitesimal part of that state
We will never be able to truly comprehend it because our time in it - both individually and collectively - is very limited

While we exist we can use the tools of philosophy and science and mathematics to understand it but it will never be complete
It is and always has and always will be greater than us and to think we can fully comprehend it is to make the greatest mistake

For there will come a point in time when we will not merely be extinct but there will be no indication we ever existed in the first place
We are just passing through - no more no less - and so need to understand our relative position as it stands in the grand scheme of things

[Dontaskme]

But who can experience a conscious death when even if someone on the street looks at you the wrong way, consciousness vanishes. Can we become conscious and capable of uniting wholeness and fragmentation into a conscious whole in which Man serves a universal purpose?

I don't know.

What I do know is that the human primate along with every other sentient creature is in the same leaking boat. The atom is maybe one replicating DNA molecule of which myriad of forms evolve to BE. It could be a life cycle within endless other life cycles appearing and disappearing infinitely for eternity, but I do not know that even. I just make up the story.
I was dead for billions of years before I was born and when I die I will be dead again. How long will I be dead before I am born again I have absolutely no idea.
I've no idea about anything except what I make up. No idea what is awareness or consciousness or mind. Except beliefs, ideas, and imaginations. And I don't even know what they are either. It's all the same not knowing nothingness.

For me, human awakening is becoming aware it is aware, meaning the thought ''I am a human'' immediately dies with that realisation, and what remains is the real truth of existence which is nothingness being everything.
I don't see any universal purpose, except to just BE.

Nature is a torture machine because of the physical pain problem. What's the purpose in that. The sentient body with a nervous system is a fail because it has the capacity to go wrong like when it's broken. And when that happens, the awareness of this brokeness is subjected to relentless suffering that comes with inevitable pain. The malfuntioning body cannot escape the pain until it ceases through death. It's not that much fun really.

What if the universe known as God is a DARK and EVIL force, and not what it is generally thought to be which is Goodness Love and Light.

Why does it have to be the GOOD PLACE, devoid of hatred and evil? When it's obviously a very hostile place. It seems we're just in total denial of the futilty and pointlessness of being alive as a sentient feeling creature. The reason it is hostile is because it cares only for it's own survival, and in that drive to survive it will fight to the death anything that gets in it's way in order to protect that. Every creature alive is born with this sadistic and selfish gene.

Humans are obsessed with their own existence, and believe they are here for a purpose that can have lasting value and meaning. In reality, the human model of reality is not what reality is. The universe is not a brain, it doesn't have any intelligence.
We swallow food down the same pipe that we use to breathe, we could literally choke to death at any time when food is present within the breathing mechanism.

The universe appearing as a human is nothing more than a sophisticated and glorified flatworm. Humans cannot accept the truth and is why they make up ideas about utopian societies. It's just all pure fantasy and imagination. I've personally bought into the dream of man serving a universal purpose, but always wake up from that dream to the actual reality of how things are, and will be, in that nothing changes.



.

[Nick_A]

DaM

I've no idea about anything except what I make up. No idea what is awareness or consciousness or mind. Except beliefs, ideas, and imaginations. And I don't even know what they are either. It's all the same not knowing nothingness.

But suppose the body of God, our universe, is a six dimensional being but animal Man recognizes the three dimensions of space. The fourth dimension we can sense is time; the repetition of a moment. But our lives consist of many moments and taken together they are called eternity or the fifth dimension. Then there are many lawful potentials for eternity and taken together they make up the sixth dimension or all possible eternities science now calls the multi verse theory. But this is the body of God. The ONE which the body is within is beyond time an space and the scope of our senses. It is logical that regardless of all the experts, Socrates is right and “I know nothing.”

I don't see any universal purpose, except to just BE.

But at the same time there may be a lot going on beyond what our limited senses experience

Nature is a torture machine because of the physical pain problem. What's the purpose in that. The sentient body with a nervous system is a fail because it has the capacity to go wrong like when it's broken. And when that happens, the awareness of this brokeness is subjected to relentless suffering that comes with inevitable pain. The malfuntioning body cannot escape the pain until it ceases through death. It's not that much fun really.

The laws of nature have to react this way. It is meaningless friction containing both pleasure and pain. Does it have meaning or react according to laws rather than God's will? Shakespeare agrees with you.

Speech: “All the world’s a stage”
BY WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
(from As You Like It, spoken by Jaques)


All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse’s arms;
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress’ eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths, and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon’s mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lin’d,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipper’d pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well sav’d, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion;
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

I am suggesting that life below Plato’s divided line, the life of the senses in the visible world,and described by Shakespeare is meaningless. But is human consciousness limited by our senses a necessity serving a universal purpose our consciousness cannot experience? Man then creates meaning to make his life liveable.

What if the universe known as God is a DARK and EVIL force, and not what it is generally thought to be which is Goodness Love and Light.

Nature and its six dimensions is a reacting machine within the consciousness of the ONE. Why consider them the same? God isn’t a machine. The machine is within the ONE. To be understood, purpose must be experienced by the quality of consciousness beyond what the senses are capable of that begins beyond the divided line which separates the visible from the intellectual world.

Why does it have to be the GOOD PLACE, devoid of hatred and evil? When it's obviously a very hostile place. It seems we're just in total denial of the futilty and pointlessness of being alive as a sentient feeling creature. The reason it is hostile is because it cares only for it's own survival, and in that drive to survive it will fight to the death anything that gets in it's way in order to protect that. Every creature alive is born with this sadistic and selfish gene.

But suppose God described by Plato as the GOOD is a necessity? If it were perfect it would be God. I is insufficient without joined by AM, then the machine governed by laws and lesser degrees of consciousness are essential. In short, the machine isn’t here to serve man but Man serves the machine as a necessity. He has the choice of serving as a reacting animal or a conscious being where the value of human consciousness is experienced and understood Rather than briefly experienced in momentary consciousness.

Conscious evolution suggests it is possible that reacting animal Man can evolve to become conscious Man where wholeness and fragmentation exit both as one and as individuals. Those who accept the potential begin to explore how it is possible. Those content with life described by Shakespeare are content with the world and its subjective interpretations of meaning. It is an ancient choice

[Dontaskme]

Nick thanks for your responses.

I'll address them in due course.

At the moment, I'm only seeing the human character on this stage we call life as being nothing more than a flatworm wearing a tuxedo.

I've tried to deny this so many times by believing God is nought but light and love and beauty.

But I've come to realise many times over, that really, the world beneath this wishful wishy washy dreamy thinking that's it's all so wonderful, lurks some extremely alarming and startling, and that is that life is just not worth living, and that it comes with a very high price tag, and never really worth the risk.

I'm not turning to the dark side like Darth Vader or anything like that...I'm just comfortably numb inside, almost dead like, and just waiting to pass from this world. Lately, I've switched my mind over to the cold stark actual reality of the way things really are, rather than just willy nilly blindly believing it could ever be any different than what it actually is, and no matter how much I would like or want things to be any different or better, I know deep down that absolutely nothing is ever going to change for the better. Nothing is evolving anymore Nick, nothing is going anywhere, it's almost like this particular timeline has reached it's end goal, and it's now heading toward total decay and decline.

Humans plan for the future is to turn sentient humans beings into mechanical AI robots. It's a future more gross than one can possibly imagine. Worse than the daily meat grinder it already is.

.

[Dontaskme]

I don't see any universal purpose, except to just BE.

But at the same time there may be a lot going on beyond what our limited senses experience

That maybe so, but at the moment, we can't know anymore than what we know so far. What ever may lay beyond is surely out of bounds to us, until it becomes our direct experience. And as of yet, I have not experienced anything other than this 3D world of limited senses.
I know some people indulge in inducing other dimensional worlds to appear to their senses as and through the use of hallucinogen drugs. But these realms cannot stay within the experiencer permanently, the experiencer has to come back from their trips to rejoin normality again.

I've never taken any such hallucinogens personally, I don't even trust normal drugs when it comes to using them for medical reasons, I just don't trust drugs. The only drug I'll accept is antibiotics for bacterial infections.

In essense, the body knows how to heal itself with the help of right mind thinking (positive) and right food intake.That's all it needs to function properly, and be healthy. Unless of course there is present a genetic or chromosomal defect that causes it to become malfunctional or even die, but that happens all the time in nature and can appear to any sentient creature not just humans.

Nick, there are a lot of good people in the world - but very often being good makes us vulnerable to attack, good people are an easy target. So I have given up trying to beat this dead horse that is so obviously and rapidly becoming our human reality. No matter how pious and good we are there will always be people who will take advantage of such people. Humans love to exploit vulnerable people because they are opportunists, and there is nothing else in reality for them to exploit, and it's namely all for wealth and power.

We are living in a narcissistic culture, where narcissists eat regular people for breakfast, and psychopaths eat narcissists for breakfast, so it definitely seems like we are entering a world completely taken over by ruthless psychopaths. It is the billionaires who are the worse kind of people. These filthy rich who run the world, are like the wolf behind little red riding hood.

.

[surreptitious57]

We are living in a narcissistic culture where narcissists eat regular people for breakfast and psychopaths eat narcissists
for breakfast so it definitely seems like we are entering a world completely taken over by ruthless psychopaths

This is nothing new - the world has always been like this - but it was much worse back then
We are now generally more moral and civilised as a species compared to how we used to be

[Nick_A]

DaM

At the moment, I'm only seeing the human character on this stage we call life as being nothing more than a flatworm wearing a tuxedo.

I agree. I’ve read that society can be described as a slug. It is the same idea. My question is if the slug can produce individuals whose being is closer to conscious humanity

But I've come to realise many times over, that really, the world beneath this wishful wishy washy dreamy thinking that's it's all so wonderful, lurks some extremely alarming and startling, and that is that life is just not worth living, and that it comes with a very high price tag, and never really worth the risk.

So we have an essential question: is life worth living?

Water seeks its own level. Our level of being attracts our lives. Animal man’s evolution is complete. The question is if animal Man can make the transition between a creature of REACTION and a conscious being capable of CONSCIOUS action? Can the being of Man evolve and return to its origin even though the human condition remains the same in the world?

We judge the value of the external world but what does the judging? We judge external reality but how can we judge our inner reality. If we haven’t made the efforts through inner empiricism to experience what we are, our inner lives how can we know if how we judge the external world is accurate?

The whole article is worth pondering but just read what I post from it. If you do we can compare how our inner reactions effect how we value the world

http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Abstracts/Needleman_93.html

A friend of mine told me recently that all his life he had been interested in the meaning of things and, naturally, that led him to a study of philosophy. What he found there, he said, was one of the greatest disappointments of his life. Instead of tackling the exciting questions, most philosophers seemed to be snared in the problems of dissecting language, and probing the nuances of grammar and semi¬arbitrary logic. There was no vitality in this work; it was all dry academic, intellectual gamesmanship. He was looking for philosophers who, as he said, "really care about reality"; who would apply their philosophical training to help cut through the intellectual morass, clarify methodologies, and get back to the relationship between reality and experience. He very kindly described me as one of those philosophers who "really cares about reality".
As it happens, I believe there is a growing number of younger philosophers who are interested in getting to the heart of the matter--about what we mean by "reality" and the central role of experience. What draws them, and what originally drew me, to the whole area of philosophy is a quest for meaning. I discovered that the mind by itself cannot complete the philosophic quest. As Kant decisively argued, the mind can ask questions the mind alone cannot answer. For me, this is where the juice of real philosophical investigation begins to flow. I believe it is precisely where intellect hits its limits that the important questions of philosophy start to come alive.
Mainstream academic philosophy has for a long time tried to answer these fundamental questions with that part of the mind we call intellect. Frequently the difficulties encountered were so great, the logical tangles so confusing, that many philosophers decided such questions were meaningless, and some even began to ridicule anyone who dared ask "What is reality?" "What is the meaning of life?" "Is there life after death?" "What is the soul?" "Does God exist?" Yet these are the questions of the heart. These are the questions that matter most to people--not whether the syntax and deep structures of our language can ever truly represent real knowledge. The meaningful questions, these " questions of the heart", rise up in human beings because of something intrinsic to our nature, an innate striving which Plato called Eros.
One aspect of this is the striving to participate in a reality greater than ourselves. It is a yearning, a hunger, a force we may recognize as love. This drive is as much, if not more, a part of our nature as the sexual, physical and animal desires which psychoanalysis and mainstream psychiatry have identified as parts of our essential nature. Our drive for understanding, for participation in a higher reality, shapes our psyche as much as anything else.
But what can the mind do with this deep participatory urge? Even at its most brilliant, the intellect alone can only ask questions that skim the surface of Eros; it cannot answer these questions. Yet such questions--the meaning of life, the nature of the soul--need to be answered. If intellect is not up to the job, how can we penetrate these mysteries? The solution, I'm proposing, is that we can only extend the reach of intellect through experience. There is a certain type of experience that opens up the mind, expands our consciousness, and allows us to approach answers to many of these fundamental questions.
In this sense, as a philosopher who cares about questions of the heart, I'm essentially a student of consciousness. I'm talking about certain kinds of experiences that we have spontaneously as human beings, but which are all too uncommon and which are not valued or understood within our culture. But when they are approached from another angle, one sees that these experiences really point to an aspect of the mind, of the psyche, beyond reason and intellect. And they do more than that: They also point to the object of those experiences, that is, to a fundamental reality. These experiences present us with an alternative or complementary way of knowing the world around us as well as the world inside us. The philosophical approach I'm talking about values these "questions of the heart" as invitations to experience, as well as to cogitations of the cerebral intellect……………………………..

Somehow philosophy must remember its purpose. Along with esoteric religions It is the only thing which can stand up to what you’ve described

Humans plan for the future is to turn sentient humans beings into mechanical AI robots. It's a future more gross than one can possibly imagine. Worse than the daily meat grinder it already is.

Our choice: becoming a better machine or becoming consciously human?

[Lacewing]

So we have an essential question: is life worth living?

I think the answer to that question will vary depending on the person and the quality of their life at any given moment. There is no specific state that one must be at, to be experiencing quality and joy in their life...and to think that their life is worth living. There are so many ways to do it... conscious or not. There are countless levels and ways of being conscious, as well as blind! There is not an ultimate state which must be attained to make anything "worth" anything. Whatever value we assign, is our own assignment. It is not a reflection of complete truth or potential for anyone.

[Lacewing]

Water seeks its own level. Our level of being attracts our lives.

I like that visual. Our lives can be like a series of waves too. I was having an interesting discussion with my boyfriend this weekend to reflect on how we came together where we are now, after all of the challenges we've each been through in life. We've both had 3 other primary relationships which were not a good fit for either of us, but we worked to do the best we could at the time. We are now an extraordinarily good fit together -- it's so natural and joyful -- and we are wondering if perhaps we might have been "paying dues" in those earlier experiences... in order to experience the potential that we have now. Like a great "balancing out" of some sort for both of us. I don't know how it all works, I just know that I've been grateful for my whole life, even the terrible parts. To me it seems that sensory experiences are the gift of a human life! Perhaps the quality and passion of a life lived with such gratitude, attracts even more to be grateful for?