The question of Appropriateness

[Plenum]

Ra uses the word 'appropriate' a total of 155 times in their answers. In contrast, Don uses the word 39 times in his questioning process.

Ra: http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=a...ull-search
Don: http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=a...e&l=30&o=r

so what is this question of appropriateness?

what is appropriate between 2 entities? what is appropriate as a form of conduct? what is appropriate being measured against, to determine what is appropriate and not appropriate?

after giving this some thought, and in the context of the Law of Free Will/Confusion, I sort of arrived at a tentative understanding of 'appropriateness'.

Appropriateness would only seem to be relevant in respect to one's own philosophical system. The beliefs and the principles that one self-subscribes to.

for eg, for an entity that is seeking to polarise positively, there are certain thoughts/behaviours that are incompatible with moving in such a direction. This is not being moralistic or judgemental towards oneself, but its just that there are certain traits that are indicative of a separative attitude. For eg, a cold calculated murder like poisoning another human being would generally be incompatible with a positive-oriented philosophy. But that is something that is self-assessed for 'appropriateness' relative to one's own belief structure.

and likewise, for the negative path, their behaviours and conduct are perfectly 'appropriate' for their path of polarization, but such conduct would be wildly inappropriate for an entity on the positive direction.

and so, in truth, to paraphrase a quote - there is no right and wrong, but only what is appropriate. And what is 'appropriate' can only be gauged against one's own striving process.

[manniz]

Plenum, I agree with you,and that is why it is very important to let everyone express themselves. And, that is exactly what this infinite creation does.

In the previous octave, there was no veil. It would have been all love everywhere. Yet, the creator deliberately introduced veil, and confusion, which led to conflicts. it does not get simpler than this.

What I learn from all this about life is - Respect the free expression, as long as it does not forcible stop someone on their path. That is exactly what the infinite creation does. Maybe that is what wise love is, instead of the emotional, protective kinda love. There are going to be third density civilizations and sixth-density society complexes, where the level of free expression would be far higher than what many of us expect. This existence is infinite. It does not let things get dull easily.

I wonder how Karma plays out in free expressing though. It should not have any role in that, even if the other side feels hurt. I wonder about these things, because so much of the religion and spirituality is about shutting off the rest of the world. Does not compute for me. Even if go inside, search within, it would not make sense to ignore what is not us.

---

And what is 'appropriate' can only be gauged against one's own striving process.

This is what gives me drive for life. And, once we incorporate it thoroughly, very easy to not be affected by criticism and in fact see if there is anything to learn. I see this as a major issue with spiritual communities world-wide.

Abuse is not good in communication, but even that is easier to handle, once we understand the value of free expression. This was one of the best things about America's foundational principles, though it has been slowly overtaken.

In my opinion. Though, true love, innocent love, honest love are so beautiful on their own that I would not feel 'appropriate" like hurting those expressing these forms of love. Some others may for the sake of discussing ideas. For the sake of criticism. Some even for just pleasure. And all that would be free expression in public settings at least.

[AnthroHeart]

This is excellent. Sometimes I wonder what is appropriate in my own life. If the things I do behind my doors are appropriate. My seeming worship of anthros, does it go too far? I have a furry tattoo, though he's not an anthro. Where I hold my thoughts most of the time, is it an appropriate placement of space. And would there be more beneficial thoughts to partake of?

[Adonai One]

Who defines what is appropriate and by what justification is an appropriate behavior true? Would a cold-calculating murder almost assuredly kill another out of a desire to falsify the existence of a thing or would it do so to see the nature of the creation itself? For if even if this intent is deciphered, could it be seen the opposite polarity of its intent is inadvertently explored due to its behaviors, inappropriate or appropriate according to a justification? One is left but to see the foundation of any appropriate behavior is inherently without justification but only a faith that such might be the case. There is only faith in a knowingness in the end and not a true knowingness of what path is taken.

[AnthroHeart]

And if one acts out of schizophrenia or other mental illness, perhaps appropriateness is more likely assured.

[Adonai One]

Acting out of mental illness would assure a lack of choice and will and thus an act without true polarity, only confusion.

[reeay]

what is 'acting out of mental illness' and why is there an assured lack of choice?

unless you're going thru some sort of psychosis that severely impairs your judgment, your ability to reason, your 'reality testing' you are still making a choice in what you are doing. Even if you are severely mentally ill, you can decide whether to engage in behaviors that would prevent any potentially negative situation in the future.

Making generalization for all mental illnesses is not recommended bc there is a wide range of conditions, levels of severity (that affect people's decision making abilities), and situational context.

[Adonai One]

Depends if you define choice as just impulse or an awareness of what you are doing.

[ChickenInSpace]

what is 'acting out of mental illness' and why is there an assured lack of choice?

unless you're going thru some sort of psychosis that severely impairs your judgment, your ability to reason, your 'reality testing' you are still making a choice in what you are doing. Even if you are severely mentally ill, you can decide whether to engage in behaviors that would prevent any potentially negative situation in the future.

Making generalization for all mental illnesses is not recommended bc there is a wide range of conditions, levels of severity (that affect people's decision making abilities), and situational context.

Actually, most OCD behaviour or 'mental illness' does not let the person with OCD chose if it wants to OCD or not. Once started the OCD acts as its own compartmentalized identity overriding your 'own' will no matter how much you sob, scream or sulk.

Unfortunately I have nothing in terms of peer papers for this. I just hung around a bunch of people with OCDs in my life.

I assume this can go for alot of both perceived and actual mental illnesses (if you like to categorize as such, that is).

[AnthroHeart]

what is 'acting out of mental illness' and why is there an assured lack of choice?

unless you're going thru some sort of psychosis that severely impairs your judgment, your ability to reason, your 'reality testing' you are still making a choice in what you are doing. Even if you are severely mentally ill, you can decide whether to engage in behaviors that would prevent any potentially negative situation in the future.

Making generalization for all mental illnesses is not recommended bc there is a wide range of conditions, levels of severity (that affect people's decision making abilities), and situational context.

Actually, most OCD behaviour or 'mental illness' does not let the person with OCD chose if it wants to OCD or not. Once started the OCD acts as its own compartmentalized identity overriding your 'own' will no matter how much you sob, scream or sulk.

Unfortunately I have nothing in terms of peer papers for this. I just hung around a bunch of people with OCDs in my life.

I assume this can go for alot of both perceived and actual mental illnesses (if you like to categorize as such, that is).

Same with Schizophrenia. I actually believed I was talking with God. Not good when they tell you to do bad stuff. But you obey because it's "God".

[Fang]

Actually, most OCD behaviour or 'mental illness' does not let the person with OCD chose if it wants to OCD or not. Once started the OCD acts as its own compartmentalized identity overriding your 'own' will no matter how much you sob, scream or sulk.

You're right, people don't get to choose their mental illnesses lol, however you've missed the point.
There is a difference between behaviour specific to an illness and behaviour in general by a person with that illness. Someone with OCD is going to be triggered by certain scenarios to act in a certain way in accordance with the predisposition provided by the condition but that is only in situations relevant to the triggering of the condition, not for all the decisions the individual makes.

You still get to make your own decisions, everyone has their limits as to what decisions you are capable of making but you still get the opportunity no less.

[reeay]

Yeah, Fang, good point.

Most if not all people who come in for treatment believe quite staunchly that they have very little choice in what they do (often times attributing problem to everybody & everything else)... that's kind of the first distortion that needs to be explored. The misunderstanding is that one is being controlled by something or not having choice in behavior. At some point people do foreclose on alternative solutions to reduce stress/anxiety by engaging in cognition (thought), affect (emotions), and behaviors that can further lead to more distress and disability. Doesn't make sense logically but it's pretty intriguing to figure out how people become the way they become.

Again, it depends on severity of condition and the type of condition (schizophrenia and psychosis & OCD can't really be compared bc it's a totally different class of condition).

[ChickenInSpace]

Actually, most OCD behaviour or 'mental illness' does not let the person with OCD chose if it wants to OCD or not. Once started the OCD acts as its own compartmentalized identity overriding your 'own' will no matter how much you sob, scream or sulk.

You're right, people don't get to choose their mental illnesses lol, however you've missed the point.
There is a difference between behaviour specific to an illness and behaviour in general by a person with that illness. Someone with OCD is going to be triggered by certain scenarios to act in a certain way in accordance with the predisposition provided by the condition but that is only in situations relevant to the triggering of the condition, not for all the decisions the individual makes.

You still get to make your own decisions, everyone has their limits as to what decisions you are capable of making but you still get the opportunity no less.

You missed the point. People perhaps do not chose the mental illness as such but the issue is that your whole life quite quickly becomes overridden by the OCD identity and takes up your whole mental sphere. 'Triggered scenarios' are often things like 'Waking up in the morning' or 'Going outside'. My point is that these situations are, for many cases, always.

[Fang]

You missed the point. People perhaps do not chose the mental illness as such but the issue is that your whole life quite quickly becomes overridden by the OCD identity and takes up your whole mental sphere. 'Triggered scenarios' are often things like 'Waking up in the morning' or 'Going outside'. My point is that these situations are, for many cases, always.

4

lol mate that's not true

Unfortunately I have nothing in terms of peer papers for this. I just hung around a bunch of people with OCDs in my life.

How surprising

[ChickenInSpace]

If you say so. We have met different people which can give us a different view of how their everyday life is. Our dispositions may differ as well with processing our experiences with people who suffer from mental illness. You seem sure so I'm guessing you've got quite the bunch of years in contact with people having these problems?

What is and what isn't surprising about me probably does not matter to the topic, though.

[Fang]

A few people you've met with OCD is not entirely an accurate reflection of the population of those with OCD. And those with OCD are nothing close to an accurate reflection of those with mental illnesses in general, and it was that group, people with mental illness in general that the sub-discussion was made about in the first place.

The reason I found the Ra Material is because of my many, many years of (intense) interaction with the mentally ill. As a result of this experience I have dedicated the last 4 years of my life studying mental illness and psychology (and I will continue to study the mind until I die), so yes, to answer your question. It's also pretty funny cos you tried to correct Rie, she knows her shi*t about this stuff, I learn a lot from her and you could to.

I'm sorry if my dismissal of your claim seemed harsh but the anecdotal evidence, irrelevancy, glaring holes in logic, cherry picked constituent of a broad topic as if it was the topic itself and "no u" response sort of made me feel like I should respond and apparently I just sound harsh through text.

And finally it would be good to note Rie's statement above that generalizations about mental health are best avoided because it is a complex and interwoven topic, not to mention huge.

edit:typo

[isis]

to paraphrase a quote - there is no right and wrong, but only what is appropriate.

i like that Garry

what is 'acting out of mental illness' and why is there an assured lack of choice? unless you're going thru some sort of psychosis that severely impairs your judgment, your ability to reason, your 'reality testing' you are still making a choice in what you are doing...

i think it's obvious they were referring to "some sort of psychosis that severely impairs your judgment." after all, psychosis is defined as "a severe" mental illness in which thought/emotions are impaired to the point where contact is entirely lost with external reality

if some1 is perceiving that god is telling them to kill their children & then they do it they feel they've done what's appropriate while the rest of us, those burdened with sanity & choice, kno this probably isn't the case. but like Garry wrote...despite the circumstances everything is likely, ultimately, appropriate

i like to think of it this way: there is no right and wrong but only what is necessary. bc it's impossible for me to presently consider some things appropriate but i remain open to the fact that at some point in the future i very well may discover all is appropriate always

And if one acts out of schizophrenia or other mental illness, perhaps appropriateness is more likely assured.

i agree

Acting out of mental illness would assure a lack of choice and will and thus an act without true polarity, only confusion.

i agree

You missed the point. People perhaps do not chose the mental illness as such but the issue is that your whole life quite quickly becomes overridden by the OCD identity and takes up your whole mental sphere. 'Triggered scenarios' are often things like 'Waking up in the morning' or 'Going outside'. My point is that these situations are, for many cases, always.

i agree w/ u. & i also agree w/ u that he missed the point. he doesn't sound harsh thru text - he sounds hungry...& like he needs to be in a house where he's permitted to be horizontal whenever he wants to be

[Melissa]

Well, I suppose it's a rather convenient 'truth'. Of course there's right and wrong, you can't go about your day without a sense of what's right or wrong. And whether you replace the words with appropriate/inappropriate or wanted/unwanted, in communication with others or whatnot, doesn't matter that much.

[isis]

Well, I suppose it's a rather convenient 'truth'. Of course there's right and wrong, you can't go about your day without a sense of what's right or wrong. And whether you replace the words with appropriate/inappropriate or wanted/unwanted, in communication with others or whatnot, doesn't matter that much.

u think things can be right or wrong. i think things can only be seemingly right or seemingly wrong

i think there's never any real disharmony...only required apparent disharmony. & y it's necessary, why seemingly inappropriate things may be necessary, is beyond me

Appropriateness would only seem to be relevant in respect to one's own philosophical system. The beliefs and the principles that one self-subscribes to...what is 'appropriate' can only be gauged against one's own striving process.

[zenmaster]

Ra suggests reviewing things of which you approve and dissaprove. The review of both is necessary due to the lack of awareness and the distortion that informs our consciousness.

[reeay]

Almost every type of condition does have genetic predisposition and certain environmental factor that shapes the condition and so 1) entity may have chosen that type if lesson by choosing situation where it may be likely to experience mental illness and 2) entity may be in environment that supports learning if certain behaviors & encounter stressors that trigger OCD behaviors or psychosis . To say, no choice is supporting the bs notion that people are helpless and victims of their condition.

You can choose to prevent illness and negative symptoms.

[AnthroHeart]

I think certain types of mental illness are having the eyes to see as Ra puts it. Sometimes you've opened yourself to higher reality, changed your awareness. Thus you start experiencing psychic phenomena. And if you can't ground the experience, it can be hard to integrate. It also has one face parts of themselves that they maybe aren't ready to face. I don't think that certain types of mental illness are simply a chemical imbalance. It could just be a very open indigo ray, without having foundational rays in place.

I used to smoke DMT, which blew my indigo ray wide open.

[Melissa]

There's nothing to review if you're not honest with yourself, that's what I was getting at, in my own scattery way. Also, if you're not honest in communication with others, which means acting accordingly after judgment is adressed and; best case scenario; also reviewed, about how they affect you (rightly or wrongly*), makes it's very difficult to establish a connection, or to decide otherwise, if need be.

*They're just words

Plus, whenever I read the news there are tons of situations described which I would consider to be wrong. Even though all is dandy in the grand scheme of things.

[Adonai One]

Almost every type of condition does have genetic predisposition and certain environmental factor that shapes the condition and so 1) entity may have chosen that type if lesson by choosing situation where it may be likely to experience mental illness and 2) entity may be in environment that supports learning if certain behaviors & encounter stressors that trigger OCD behaviors or psychosis . To say, no choice is supporting the bs notion that people are helpless and victims of their condition.

You can choose to prevent illness and negative symptoms.

Uncertain premises.

[isis]

nevermind

[AnthroHeart]

Temporary insanity caused me once to be suicidal, thinking I was headed for the negative space/time of my creation that I was working on. That killing myself would prevent me from being harvested negative. It's only been a couple of years, but fortunately I couldn't find the pills I was planning to take. If I hadn't found the Law of One, I wouldn't have known about negative time/space and the like. Perhaps I wouldn't have been suicidal then, because I wouldn't have been trying to create a world, and worried that I violated their free will. To me, in my state, violating another's free will was the worst "sin" I could commit. I didn't realize that we unintentionally violate others' free will at certain times.

I don't think you can go through life without violating anyone's free will. Can you?

[Adonai One]

To say someone has chosen their life plan and that somebody's life plan is destiny are two different things. The latter as a philosophy is hard to bear for the unfortunate people who are at the scorn of a judge one day in a horrible country and get life in prison for peddling propaganda against the government.

What an ineffective way to manage existence.

[xise]

I see responsibility, accountability, as percentages rather than an absolute on/off concept.

Mental illness decreases one's responsibility and accountability. But underneath it all, I still believe free will governs. However, giving into the mental illness is understandable.

Very rarely is any choice absolutely free. But I don't know of a choice that is not at least partially free. That is how I see free will.

If I'm being tortured and my family is tortured in front of me unless I do something that my torturers want, I'm probably going to do whatever they want. I believe I would have diminished accountability and responsibility in that situation, but ultimately I chose via my free will. It may not have been a fair or completely free choice, but I gave my free will.

That's how I see things. Nothing can take your free will consciousness away.

However, I can see responsibility or accountability so diminished as to be almost meaningless in cases of complete and utter deception (ie, press this button to start the dishwasher - omg it was actually linked to a nuclear launch button and I killed millions!). Perhaps certain mental illnesses can arise to this level. But I'm not sure self-deception is in the same category as deception by others. Definitely an interesting subject.

[AnthroHeart]

What if you are fooled by negative entities that speak through intuition? Say you do something bad, and you sort of know it's bad. You could call it mental illness. But if you were truly under the mental illness, would you have no fear in acting out in that manner. Say it was to attack one you loved. Because the entity speaking to you pretended it was someone important. It could be God, it could be your higher self. In either case, you're fooled by a negative being.

How appropriate is it for you to act, even knowing in the back of your mind that it is somehow wrong to attack another? Even trying to kill them, because you think it somehow will save the Universe. And you carry the attempt through, despite some reservations? Does a true mental illness have no reservations about doing something?

[xise]

What if you are fooled by negative entities that speak through intuition? Say you do something bad, and you sort of know it's bad. You could call it mental illness. But if you were truly under the mental illness, would you have no fear in acting out in that manner. Say it was to attack one you loved. Because the entity speaking to you pretended it was someone important. It could be God, it could be your higher self. In either case, you're fooled by a negative being.

How appropriate is it for you to act, even knowing in the back of your mind that it is somehow wrong to attack another? Even trying to kill them, because you think it somehow will save the Universe. And you carry the attempt through, despite some reservations? Does a true mental illness have no reservations about doing something?

I can only speak for myself, but at an early age (teenage years), when I was exposed to the supposed Biblical story of some guy sacrificing his son because God demanded it, I thought that was f'ed up and I would never blindly follow anyone, not even God/higher self/anything. But I've always been a rebellious type.

However, I'm sure I could have definitely been fooled into doing something I regret, but it would have to be through another distortion rather than obedience to a superior being.

In conclusion GW, I don't have the answer (or even the beginnings of an answer) to your question at this time.