(05-13-2016, 01:53 PM)Minyatur Wrote:

(05-13-2016, 12:38 PM)Aion Wrote: I don't think any competition is infringing or STS when all individuals have agreed to the competition. When you go online to play against other people you have agreed to the competition and the conditions of the competition by your participation. There is the pre-knowledge that there will be a 'winner' (such as the person with the most points) in the game, so if you go in without this awareness or in denial of this basic aspect then you have really just deceived yourself as to what it is you are participating in.

If you don't care about how it turns out that is perfectly fine, but as soon as you enter the 'arena' I say you have accepted all the conditions of the competition and so if someone beats you there is no infringement.

Is that not exactly what negative densities would be, in regards to the negative entities relating to one another?

(05-13-2016, 01:55 PM)Manjushri Wrote: What is the end-result emotion felt by the HUMAN whose avatar's head you blew off with an uzi?

(05-13-2016, 02:15 PM)Aion Wrote:

(05-13-2016, 01:55 PM)Manjushri Wrote: What is the end-result emotion felt by the HUMAN whose avatar's head you blew off with an uzi?

Probably depends a lot on the human, no?

(05-13-2016, 02:23 PM)Manjushri Wrote:

(05-13-2016, 02:15 PM)Aion Wrote:

(05-13-2016, 01:55 PM)Manjushri Wrote: What is the end-result emotion felt by the HUMAN whose avatar's head you blew off with an uzi?

Probably depends a lot on the human, no?

Very much so.
If the question is "are competitive video games STS?" Doesn't it ultimately depend upon what you "do" to the human you are playing with?

(05-13-2016, 02:30 PM)Aion Wrote: Hmm, I suppose so, but that's a pretty complicated thought. Wouldn't that be true for any competitive field?

However, the way you phrase it sounds like a 'victim/assailant' kind of situation, where one is just merely having something 'done' to them by the other, but most videos games are mutual interactions so both players interact with and act towards eachother, so it seems to me like you are maybe correlating the actions in the game with actions towards the person?

Again, since both have entered in to the game knowing the conditions of the game there isn't any infringement of will when one beats another.

Now, if we are talking about obnoxious kids gloating and insulting over headsets that is entirely different from the game itself and is then a matter of communication from human to human and is no longer about the game. Sure, someone could use their victory in this way, but that is true for literally any field of human experience. They are catalyst to be used positively or negatively or not at all.

(05-13-2016, 02:44 PM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote:

(05-13-2016, 02:30 PM)Aion Wrote: Hmm, I suppose so, but that's a pretty complicated thought. Wouldn't that be true for any competitive field?

However, the way you phrase it sounds like a 'victim/assailant' kind of situation, where one is just merely having something 'done' to them by the other, but most videos games are mutual interactions so both players interact with and act towards eachother, so it seems to me like you are maybe correlating the actions in the game with actions towards the person?

Again, since both have entered in to the game knowing the conditions of the game there isn't any infringement of will when one beats another.

Now, if we are talking about obnoxious kids gloating and insulting over headsets that is entirely different from the game itself and is then a matter of communication from human to human and is no longer about the game. Sure, someone could use their victory in this way, but that is true for literally any field of human experience. They are catalyst to be used positively or negatively or not at all.

I guess my question is, how is this different from the "game" of 3D reality? I mean, in theory, haven't we all incarnated here willingly to "lose" ourselves in the drama? And that's precisely what happens in games, people know it's not real, but it's hard to not have very real emotional reactions. We also believe that all entities, even those who are imprisoned or abused by those who are STS, are willingly and knowingly engaged, on some level. So yeah in the end it's all okay, but it doesn't make all polarity go away just because everyone's agreed to it.

(05-13-2016, 03:13 PM)Minyatur Wrote: Well negative polarity was born through confusion, so does make sense that it happens only through certain circumstances and that there is never an inherent desire of it.

I don't think positive densities are all hugging and rainbows, but I still doubt that friendly competition can yield the same deepness of experience as unfriendly competition. Maybe the entire Octave could be seen as just a rainbow though.

(05-13-2016, 02:53 PM)Aion Wrote: Really, my conclusive thought would be "video games aren't STS/STO, people are STS/STO, video games are catalyst".

(05-13-2016, 03:15 PM)Aion Wrote:

(05-13-2016, 03:13 PM)Minyatur Wrote: Well negative polarity was born through confusion, so does make sense that it happens only through certain circumstances and that there is never an inherent desire of it.

I don't think positive densities are all hugging and rainbows, but I still doubt that friendly competition can yield the same deepness of experience as unfriendly competition. Maybe the entire Octave could be seen as just a rainbow though.

My friend, you will see infinite depth in whichever pool you choose to look in. I assure you there is just as much depth regardless of the pool since ultimately they are all the same basin.

Quote:34.12 Questioner: I thought that that was correct, but I wasn’t sure. Can you give me the same type of information that we have been getting here with respect to the unmanifested self interacting between self and gadgets, toys, etc.— inventions?

Ra: I am Ra. In this particular instance we again concentrate for the most part in the orange and in the yellow energy centers. In a negative sense many of the gadgets among your peoples, that is what you call your communication devices and other distractions such as the less competitive games, may be seen to have the distortion of keeping the mind/body/spirit complex unactivated so that yellow- and orange-ray activity is much weakened thus carefully decreasing the possibility of eventual green-ray activation.



Others of your gadgets may be seen to be tools whereby the entity explores the capabilities of its physical or mental complexes and in some few cases, the spiritual complex, thus activating the orange ray in what you call your team sports and in other gadgets such as your modes of transport. These may be seen to be ways of investigating the feelings of power; more especially, power over others or a group power over another group of other-selves.

19.15 Ra Wrote:The second-density concept of serving self includes the serving of those associated with tribe or pack. This is not seen in second density as separation of self and other-self. All is seen as self since in some forms of second-density entities, if the tribe or pack becomes weakened, so does the entity within the tribe or pack.

The new or initial third-density entity has this innocent, shall we say, bias or distortion towards viewing those in the family, the society, as you would call, perhaps, country, as self. Thus though a distortion not helpful for progress in third density, it is without polarity.

The break becomes apparent when the entity perceives other-selves as other-selves and consciously determines to manipulate other-selves for the benefit of the self. This is the beginning of the road of which you speak.

Quote:33.14 Questioner: OK. [What] I would like for you to do is list all the major mechanisms designed to provide catalytic experience that do not include interaction with other-self. That’s the first part of the question I’ll ask.

Ra: I am Ra. We grasp from this question that you realize that the primary mechanism for catalytic experience in third density is other-self. The list of other catalytic influences: firstly, the Creator’s universe; secondly, the self.

33.15 Questioner: Can you list any sub-headings under the self that would— or ways that the self is acted on catalytically to produce experience?

Ra: I am Ra. Firstly, the self unmanifested. Secondly, the self in relation to the societal self created by self and other-self. Thirdly, the interaction between self and the gadgets, toys, and amusements of the self, other-self invention. Fourthly, the self relationship with those attributes which you may call war and rumors of war.

Quote:During the first, shall we say, perhaps 150 to 200 of your years as you measure time, a mind/body/spirit complex is going through the process of a spiritual childhood. The mind and the body are not enough in a disciplined configuration to lend clarity to the spiritual influxes. Thus, the remaining time span is given to optimize the understandings which result from experience itself.

Questioner: Then at present it would seem that our current life span is much too short for those who are new to third-density lessons. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. Those entities which have, in some way, learned/taught themselves the appropriate distortions for rapid growth can now work within the confines of the shorter life span. However, the greater preponderance of your entities find themselves in what may be considered a perpetual childhood.

Quote:How we spend our days is how we spend our lives - Annie Dillard

(05-11-2016, 12:16 PM)APeacefulWarrior Wrote: Personally, I find really big "open world" style games to be fascinating because, in some ways, they mirror the incarnative process.  Someone could live a half-dozen lives or more in Skyrim or Fallout, and even if some of the same events occurred, the way the player could respond might vary entirely every time.  It's like exploring the quantum decision-making web in a scale model.  Plus, so many lessons to potentially be learned by looking at different reactions and how they impact the player and the game world.  (Fallout even goes so far as to explicitly describe the long-term impact of the player's actions, and Fallout New Vegas is especially detailed.)

Or, while I do sometimes use them to blow off steam as well, I also have a love of running around in GTA IV and V without causing mayhem.  There's something very interesting about being in a true consequence-free situation where I'm ostensibly able to behave as poorly as I like without any significant penalty... and choosing to just drive around safely and go shopping instead.  There's definitely some lessons one could learn there about patience and self-control.

Even competitive games can be useful in one's own development.  Mario Kart has been a great teacher of anger management and acceptance of the chaotic nature of life.  The same basic thing goes for Rocket League, for that matter.  One might even be able to use them in the same way older masters used to use martial arts to bring greater mental clarity and unification between mind and action.  (The Wu-Wei of Mario Kart?)

Which is all to say, in a more general sense, there are plenty of ways one can use video games as opportunities to expand the mind, at least games which are beyond a certain threshold of complexity.

(05-11-2016, 08:14 PM)earth_spirit Wrote: It should not be particularly difficult to love your opponent when you consider that the game would not take place without competing players.. and even easier if you're one of the few who penetrate the veil enough to know that all is one. Doing your best to match wits or brawn with a consenting opponent within a frame of courtesy and sportsmanship can be interpreted as a loving service.

(05-10-2016, 03:43 AM)blossom Wrote: Especially competitive ones. The goal most of the times is to have more than others, stronger than others, have as much money, be above others in score etc.
It feels as if this is the reality some STS entities would like to live. Controlling others with power and experience, eliminating those who oppose you. And of course being famous and looked upon.

Now I know video games are just fun to play and no harm. But let's speak outside the box.

Quote:I love co-op games and have had the chance to work on some amazing ones (Left 4 Dead 1 & 2, Portal 2).

After the release of Left 4 Dead (L4D), I received an email that changed forever how I think about making games. It was from a soldier stationed in Iraq who said L4D had saved his marriage. It was simple—he and his wife missed each other and talking on the phone just made them realize this more and feel even more miserable. But jumping into a game of L4D let them forget that and just exist in the moment. They could spend time in each other’s company as if they were sitting next to each other on the couch at home.

That is powerful and something only the shared experience of games can bring.