Polarity vs. Orientation

[3DMonkey]

At the same time, Ra indicates that Orion is an equal contributing factor in evolution or transcendence.

Ra says Hitler was trying to do good. But we generally feel bound by morals to disagree with the idea that hitler was good. Same with Orion- we can't judge the goodness or badness regarding the welfare.

"is the veil good or bad?"
"I don't know. It's just there"

[Shin'Ar]

At the same time, Ra indicates that Orion is an equal contributing factor in evolution or transcendence.

Ra says Hitler was trying to do good. But we generally feel bound by morals to disagree with the idea that hitler was good. Same with Orion- we can't judge the goodness or badness regarding the welfare.

"is the veil good or bad?"
"I don't know. It's just there"

A conributuing factor in what regard though? A murderer contributes to depopulation as equally as does a fatal disease.

Hitler's opinion of what he deemed to be good, places the onus on someone else to decide whether it was good or not. If one thinks that genocide is an act of goodness, than I can see where there will be many who might choose to disgree with that defintion.

The veil has nothing to do with good or evil, not sure why you brought that into the discussion.

[zenmaster]

Is a higher score better or is it worse?

You really don't make any distinction between qualification and evaluation? One uses evaluation to qualify, not the other way around. In other words, to determine something does not also require an assessment of quality or of relative quality or of merit or of worth (good or bad). Elsewhere Ra talks about positive and negative feelings, so Don and Ra were certainly aware of the distinction.

"That's the color blue". "Oh, I do like the color blue".

Or in the sense of the magnet analogy, not only is there nothing to qualify, there is nothing to evaluate with regards to polarity. Because you don't have both poles for comparison. There is only one actual 'pole', with the other created by 'the universe'.

[βαθμιαίος]

These statements seem incompatible: "All judgment to me is value judgment," "You really don't make any distinction between qualification and evaluation?" I'm trying to understand your terms and the way you use them. Does judgment = qualification and value judgment = evaluation? If so, it would seem that you're the one not distinguishing between qualification and evaluation.

In other words, to determine something does not also require an assessment of quality or of relative quality or of merit or of worth (good or bad).

That is the point I was making.

Or in the sense of the magnet analogy, not only is there nothing to qualify, there is nothing to evaluate with regards to polarity. Because you don't have both poles for comparison. There is only one actual 'pole', with the other created by 'the universe'.

It seems like this is the heart of the disagreement. A magnet has two poles, north and south or positive and negative. That's the point of the analogy.

[zenmaster]

These statements seem incompatible: "All judgment to me is value judgment," "You really don't make any distinction between qualification and evaluation?" I'm trying to understand your terms and the way you use them. Does judgment = qualification and value judgment = evaluation? If so, it would seem that you're the one not distinguishing between qualification and evaluation.

Judgment is evaluation- or as Ra says, a faculty. Qualification is applied evaluation, as in ethical considerations (relative merits). There really is a difference.

Or in the sense of the magnet analogy, not only is there nothing to qualify, there is nothing to evaluate with regards to polarity. Because you don't have both poles for comparison. There is only one actual 'pole', with the other created by 'the universe'.

It seems like this is the heart of the disagreement. A magnet has two poles, north and south or positive and negative. That's the point of the analogy.

Yes, a magnet has two poles. So with negative or positive polarity, you have one pole. Do you see? Where is the other pole?

[βαθμιαίος]

Judgment is evaluation- or as Ra says, a faculty. Qualification is applied evaluation, as in ethical considerations (relative merits). There really is a difference.

I don't think we disagree that there is a difference. When you said "All judgment to me is value judgment," I thought you were using "value judgment" to refer to what you are now calling "qualification."

However, I don't think Ra uses the term "judgment" in the way that you do. Here's the quote where they refer to it as a faculty: "It is not for a being of polarity in the physical consciousness to pick and choose among attributes, thus building the roles that cause blockages and confusions in the already-distorted mind complex. Each acceptance smoothes part of the many distortions that the faculty you call judgment engenders."

They are using it as a referent to the idea of "picking and choosing among attributes," or what you are now calling qualification/applied evaluation.

Yes, a magnet has two poles. So with negative or positive polarity, you have one pole. Do you see? Where is the other pole?

At the other end of the magnet.

[Shin'Ar]

The pole that Zen speaks of is infinity. One becoming two in opposite directions until they become one again.

The evaluation is only possible in that the Source of this enabling of direction has consciousness to consider the directions and their differences.

---

An important matter to consider here is that when Ra speaks of 'distortion', it is not used in the way that we usually apply meaning to distortion. Most often distortion means to distort truth, or to disrupt. But here it simply means a disruption of frequency waves that causes them to vibrate in a particular manner.

So it is crucial not to use the word distortion to mean negative.

Also important to consider is the emotional aspect of judgement and qualification.

[zenmaster]

They are using it as a referent to the idea of "picking and choosing among attributes," or what you are now calling qualification/applied evaluation.

Ra says that it is not possible to do that, whereas it is possible to evaluate.

Yes, a magnet has two poles. So with negative or positive polarity, you have one pole. Do you see? Where is the other pole?

At the other end of the magnet.

Yes, at the other end of the magnet. Where is the other end of the magnet? So we have come full circle. This is why it is not possible to determine polarity of an act or an entity with respect to the magnet analogy.

[Shin'Ar]

When the Source first moved upon infinity, in a state of consciousness, it thought and chose what it should do next. It perceived its state of being and chose to move. There could have been no evaluation or judgement because there was nothing in existence to use as comparison or consideration. There was consciousness awareness, and choice to move; to become.

Man often forgets the true extent of emotion on their being because it has always been a normal part of our existence. Just as we often take for granted the many aspects and attributes of creation all around us.

If we can manage to relate our emotion to its true origin, we can better understand these other aspects of judgement, evaluation and quantification that are being tossed around here so casually.

Suppose that the Source chose to become uncreative and lazy. Suppose it created fragments of its consciousness and then deliberately chose to instill them with evil, without free will? What sort of an existence would we all be experiencing?

Suppose that the Source chose to be absolutley alone in existence and never thought to experience anything other than its initial state of being?

Choice does not originate in the human mind, with free will. Choice originates where the Source of all things became an Intelligent Infinity of emotion and thought. We know such exists because we are proof of it.

Emotion and the expression of it is the very core of what we are. When the Ancients say that we are made in the likeness of God, this was what they were trying to relate to us. We are a reflection of the Source, because we are the Source experiencing itself.

Our emotional being cannot be cast off as unnecessary in our attempt to understand polarity and the balance of it in the context of everything being of One Consciousness, because that One Consciousness is pure emotion.

To judge between polarities is no different than the Source chooosing to move or not move, to care or not care.

[zenmaster]

So it is crucial not to use the word distortion to mean negative.

Or apply a negative connotation to 'bias'.

[zodekai]

Polaris is known to be a star of Orientation. Especially when coming full circle.

[Shin'Ar]

So it is crucial not to use the word distortion to mean negative.

Or apply a negative connotation to 'bias'.

That would depend on the bias would it not?

if one's bias is twoard a negative aspect, than it is negative, not because of the bias but because of the fact that is negative.

[βαθμιαίος]

"It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to judge the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet."

To sum up the disagreement: you read the quote to say, "It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to determine the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet," while I read it to say, "It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to judge the relative goodness of the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet."

Accurate?

Yes, at the other end of the magnet. Where is the other end of the magnet? So we have come full circle. This is why it is not possible to determine polarity of an act or an entity with respect to the magnet analogy.

Your argument was that there was only one pole. Would you accept "axis" instead of "pole?"

[zenmaster]

Man often forgets the true extent of emotion on their being bevcause it has always been a normal part of our existence. Just as we often take for granted the many aspects and attributes of creation all around us.

Emotional awareness is developmental. It's not just forgetting emotion. It's not being conscious of that aspect of self in the first place. If you can at least recognize emotion, even if it is in the form a memory, you have yet another way to process catalyst.

[Shin'Ar]

I disagree that emotion is developmental. Emotion is born with the Source of it and is the essence of what that being is.

and it was emotional before any other thing or event took place. In a state of emotional being it became creation, so how could it be developmental before there was development to begin with? Its origin and actual being does not mean that it cannot develop however. It simply means that emotion has a far deeper root than the mere development of it through the experience of creation.

[zenmaster]

So it is crucial not to use the word distortion to mean negative.

Or apply a negative connotation to 'bias'.

That would depend on the bias would it not?

if one's bias is twoard a negative aspect, than it is negative, not because of the bias but because of the fact that is negative.

I meant negative connotation with respect to the term's use in the material, as with the term 'distortion'. As in understand your biases in order to remove distortions, and not associate negativity (emotional kind) with the concept.

[Shin'Ar]

I meant negative connotation with respect to the term's use in the material, as with the term 'distortion'. As in understand your biases in order to remove distortions, and not associate negativity (emotional kind) with the concept.

My misunderstanding Zen, I do apologize. Yes, undertstanding and emotion play a large part in the altering of distortion.

[zenmaster]

I disagree that emotion is developmental.

You have what has been made conscious and what is still unconscious. The source of emotion is unconscious - for example libido or what not. In some manner this comes through to consciousness. For the less aware, this tends to be in the form of an unconscious reaction to something. But there is a process involved in becoming more aware and removing distortions. And one's affect is necessarily evolved. The temper-tantrum baby vs the temperament of the mature adult. The link I posted shows rather clearly the various stages.

[Shin'Ar]

I disagree that emotion is developmental.

You have what has been made conscious and what is still unconscious. The source of emotion is unconscious - for example libido or what not. In some manner this comes through to consciousness. For the less aware, this tends to be in the form of an unconscious reaction to something. But there is a process involved in becoming more aware and removing distortions. And one's affect is necessarily evolved. The temper-tantrum baby vs the temperament of the mature adult. The link I posted shows rather clearly the various stages.

That is like comparing the involuntary functioning of the heart to the voluntary decision to flatulate. I may choose emotionally to avoide causing discomfort to someone nearby by containing myself, where as I cannot emotionally choose to stop my heart from beating. I am really not sure of your argument here and how it pertains to my point that we all make emotional judgements with regard to how we interact with polarites.

I think after re-reading your post you may have been trying to suggest that the origin of emotion found in the Source as I proposed it was unconscious. Yet you vaguely suggest that in some manner this comes through to consciousness. I would ask you to clarify that in more detail because it seems to contradict itself. Or you must define what this "manner" is in which it comes into consciousness.

the point I am making here is that emotion is at the root of our very being, as the One Consciousness, and cannot be separated from the process od understanding and being able to balance polarity.

[zenmaster]

"It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to judge the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet."

To sum up the disagreement: you read the quote to say, "It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to determine the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet," while I read it to say, "It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to judge the relative goodness of the polarity of an act or an entity, just as it is impossible to judge the relative goodness of the negative and positive poles of the magnet."

Accurate?

Yes.

Yes, at the other end of the magnet. Where is the other end of the magnet? So we have come full circle. This is why it is not possible to determine polarity of an act or an entity with respect to the magnet analogy.

Your argument was that there was only one pole. Would you accept "axis" instead of "pole."

What I was saying is that there is only one available pole for use in evaluation, the other is the universe itself (or as ShinAr said, 'infinity').

[Shin'Ar]

It would probably be considerate of me to bow out now, having made my point of emotion being part of the process of defining the aspects or attributes of the differences between polar opposites and the blend between them.

This is an ongoing discussion between Zen and (if I could type it I would). Thanks for your response Zen.

[zenmaster]

Yet you vaguely suggest that in some manner this comes through to consciousness. I would ask you to clarify that in more detail because it seems to contradict itself. Or you must define what this "manner" is in which it comes into consciousness.

The manner as allowed by whatever mental distortions one has. It's going to follow some pattern which is largely what the mind does, it patterns. This could be a separate thread if you want.

the point I am making here is that emotion is at the root of our very being, as the One Consciousness, and cannot be separated from the process od understanding and being able to balance polarity.

Sure, but the point I'm making is that to become conscious of that connection is developmental and the nature of that connection and how emotion is manifest by an individual is an ongoing process. That is, how one relates to emotion is developmental and is proportional to awareness.

[βαθμιαίος]

(if I could type it I would)

[zenmaster]

(if I could type it I would).

All you need is a Greek keyboard. Just unplug the English one, swap it out for the Greek one, and type the name when necessary.

[3DMonkey]

A conributuing factor in what regard though? A murderer contributes to depopulation as equally as does a fatal disease.

This contribution is just to the body complex- individual and collective. Such an act contributes to a long chain, or a spider web even, of mental and spiritual contributions.

Say murder happens. The murderer thought him/her self to be doing what is right (intent). It contributes to some people being sad and some being angry. This, in turn, leads to reflection and forgiveness. Then people come together in love and new seeds of love are planted. .... Was the murder still "bad"? Well, it is impossible to judge.

[Shin'Ar]

Was the murder still "bad"? Well, it is impossible to judge.

This would be extremely circumstantial IMO.

I think one would be certainly trying to be deceptive and bias toward wrongdoing, if they were to attempt to suggest that a person who raped and mutilated and yound child, would somehow have done some good to humanity, because at her funeral there would have been a large outpouring of love and affection.

There is always an outcome. The means to arriving there is not always an act of compassion.

[zenmaster]

Was the murder still "bad"? Well, it is impossible to judge.

This would be extremely circumstantial IMO.

I would go further and suggest that as we know that certain ways of merely framing circumstances do result in what appear to be desired consequences, people use this technique to shape opinion and action. The techniques range from merely 'spin' due to personal bias, to exaggerating the truth, or to actually lying or misleading to provoke and to produce change. STO and STS alike take advantage of gaps in awareness or information to falsely depict situations.