Collective Learning | Gathering Spot

Hmmm ... let me watch it again

First, let me say that many of us are too busy to log on everyday, so a little patience is warranted in anticipation of our responses.

Now for my feedback, which you may not likemuch. The initial premise of David Christian's talk is that life goes from complexity to mush. This seems contrary to everything I've observed in life. For example, when life begins, it starts from a few cells which divide and combine in increasing complexity until it forms a complicated life form -- a frog, a tree, or a human being. Indeed, DC's talk seems to suggest this very thing, so I'm not sure what his point is. Maybe someone can explain his talk for me.

Gary,

The presentation you just posted here depends on the validity of Big Bang. Just want to point out that a while ago you posted a topic that questions the Big Bang Theory. Here's that whole thread: http://www.gatheringspot.net/video/general-discussion/great-stuff-stuff-absolutely-fascinating-me

And here's an article on the same thing: http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/

The BB-is-Wrong theory seems more credible to me. BB seems too time-concept-bound and conventional-physics-concept-bound. The idea that there is no beginning or end is more in line with the feel (for me) of the way things really are. An unfathomable mystery. Is time even real?*

*A secondary topic: The truth is that we can't observe time -- can't even find it. All we can observe is sequences of events in the pysical world, like the movement of a hand over a dial with numbers printed on it, or the rising and setting of the sun. Or driving to work and home again. If something exists it should be something in itself, so what is time? Is it just a mental construct, a subjective phenomenon?

Quote Noa
"First, let me say that many of us are too busy to log on everyday, so a little patience is warranted in anticipation of our responses."

Have you determined my patience and anticipatory resolves somehow? Please enlighten me as to how this is done. Can you think of any reason for my second post other than your judgemental and scornful display of condemnation towards my assumed and injected, impatience? Also are you implying that somehow some of the, special you, are attending to some busy-ness that I am somehow neglecting or just that I am idle and can log on every day (which I can not possibly do) and that in my feeble mind I should consider my assumed and injected privilege of being able to do so (which I can not possibly do), and remeber to be mindful and feel for those less fortunate?

Quote Noa
"Now for my feedback, which you may not likemuch."
Again, have you some determining device as to my .... me and my take on the exact same ideas and information you have just observed, as being so contrasted with any statement from you, that it puts us into pre-opposing catagories of mindset or worldview, that you get a feeling I'm not gonna like your response? I'd like to know how the hell you do that. More importantly, to me, is, why, would you do that? Even if your device is accurate, things can change between data inputs.

Quote Noa
"The initial premise of David Christian's talk is that life goes from complexity to mush. This seems contrary to everything I've observed in life. For example, when life begins, it starts from a few cells which divide and combine in increasing complexity until it forms a complicated life form -- a frog, a tree, or a human being. Indeed, DC's talk seems to suggest this very thing, so I'm not sure what his point is. Maybe someone can explain his talk for me."

First off, I think "initial premise" is key here. Complexity to mush in accordance with entropy is the first thing you hear and see, but that supposed "premise" is clarified shortly after, and one discovers what he's going to say will be in contrast to such a notion. To me, your statement and the question posed is indicative of someone who has only retained part of the story. Maybe one should access ones span of attentiveness with the entire span of the talk itself, and in turn, the afforementioned statement and question may become silly and irrealevant, or at the very most, unneccessary.

What he actually said is that thermal dynamics says everything breaks down to mush, however when accessing the evidence, we see great complexity that is dynamic and ever increasing. He then proceeds to threshold complexity through developments over time. The significance being, actually paying attention to whats going on and what has gone on in hopes of seeing and recognizing possibilities in relation to what could be going in the future, thus becoming responsible contibutors and not chaotic victoms or oblivious participants.

I think this is his point. A small seemingly simple seed produces a complicated life form. When considered, the complexity of the seed must be even greater than the life form. However, life forms learn. At first individualy, and later, collectively. Things are inherently complex and kind of built in, to progress to a certain level, and then the lifeform takes over, increasing brand new complexity, at first out of the built in tendencies, then through individual and collective learning, the complexity increases by sub conscious accessment and input, to be replaced later by conscious participation, called creativity. I think he makes the point that at our stage of human collective learning and contribution to complexity, when there are no rules, you are allowed to contribute what you want or what just happens to get contributed without you being exactly conscious of it. Therfore, it may behoove us to, at this powerful stage of our existance, take notice, recognize and become fully conscious of our contributions through collective learning, and commence with some conscious, mindful, thoughtful, unified and collective intent and application as a planetary, humanity level, intelligent, consciousness. Work with and as the complexity on a conscious level before our unconscious level of contribution, complexes us right out of the equation.
It was a very powerful message for me.

Frankly, my patience IS wore thin when it comes to you, Noa. It's obvious when I say something is powerful, that you place no stock in that at all. Your simplistic and crass treatment of response conveys that fully. If it all amounted to what you convey in your response, then wouldn't you at least wonder how I could say this was so powerful to me?

Whoever said you can shine light on darkness but you can't bring in more dark to the light was hugely mistaken. Everytime you express yourself in here you bring some darkness to light. The advice you give so often and so freely (exposes judgemental-ness and auto implies a sense of superior belief or knowledge). The cynical, contrary, unyielding and generally negative stance of opinion, you express, drawn from a bank of established and held tight templates, with such unchanging surity, is cast down before the light, regularly and without hesitation. So maybe you can't add darkness to extinguish the light but you can put it in front of the light, exposing it to all who can see. I don't need the assumptions and insincerety of an uninterested response to a less than adequate observation of thoughtfully presented, heartfelt material. I also don't want your advice, thank you so much.

Having said all that, I have no doubt we can overcome our differences. I'm not mad at you and I forgive myself for allowing this to come through. I truly believe in the end, we both want and could agree on the same things. We just need to aquire more information, to extract the knowledge from it and to apply the wisdom of it. As we go along you can count on only one thing. Everything will change. A little free love wouldn't hurt, also. At least we're trying.

Bob

I do not know what presentation you watched, but the one I posted absolutely does NOT depend on the big bang theory. I believe he refered to it as a starting point towards the beginning, but complexity and collective learning are stand alone discussions, when it comes to the big bang. In fact the discussion remains uneffected by "a bang" or by "no bang". It works the same either way. Did you actualy watch the video? I'm thinking not. Maybe you were distracted?

Your comments on time are unrelated to my post. Time was not discussed, history was.

Information naturally complexifies over time. I we assume that all that is real is matter/energy then the second law of themodynamics holds sway. However, physicists Seth Lloyd & Henry Stapp (I just read in Earth Changes and the Human Cosmic Connection - a very interesting read BTW) stated, "...instead of taking mathematics to be primary, followed by physicsand then information, the picture should be inverted in our explanatory scheme, so that we find the conceptual hierarchy: information-> laws of physics -> matter." [from Davies, P. & Gregersen, N., Information and the Nature of Reality, p.3]

IMO, consciousness/awareness is even more fundamental and is the subsuming field in which information, physics and matter appear as the knowables. Knowing being the cognizant quality of the openness we know as awareness.

Am I the only one to actually watch the whole video? I am at a loss and cannot relate one piece of your response, John, to the original post in order to form an opinion and a reply other than what I have stated here.

in other words, what does your reply have to do with my post, John?

This post has been hijacked 3, well actually 4 afferent directions, having nothing to do with what I found to be so powerfull.

I am disappointed to say the least. How queer ... ?

I'm tired of this in more ways than one. I'm tired of the people not getting along here and I'm also tired of the mainstream scientific arrogance that they "know" what happened 3 billion years ago. It feels like nothing but a myth to me but he speaks it as if he knows it to be true.

Sorry to be so negative.

Why are you so angry, Gary? You asked for feedback and then when you get it, you lash out in anger. Not everyone is going to be blown away by all our posts. It happens to everyone here, so don't take it personally. Give us a break.

I commented about your patience because I noticed a similar request for feedback in your prior post after only 2 days without a response. http://www.gatheringspot.net/video/general-discussion/magic-im-curious-what-everyone-thinks-about-these-guys-isnt-magic-i-grew-it My comment wasn't meant to be a criticism, rather I thought if you understood the delay, you might feel better about waiting for a response.

Even in your heated reply to my comment you admit that "we see great complexity that is dynamic and ever increasing" so why are you affected so negatively by my response? I basically said the same thing you did, which is contrary to what the speaker said. We agree with each other! Additionally, I admitted that I didn't understand DC's point and I asked someone to explain it to me. That doesn't give you the right to insult me for not finding it to be as "powerful" as you did. I truly didn't get it. That doesn't make me a bad person or warrant your insults.

On one hand you say, "there are no rules, you are allowed to contribute what you want or what just happens to get contributed without you being exactly conscious of it." But, apparently, this doesn't apply to me because my contribution isn't appreciated.

Clearly my statement that you might not like my feedback much was right on the mark, so why on earth would that statement get you so hot? I didn't say you will not like my feedback; I said you might not like it, what's so offensive about that? Do you want honest feedback or do you only want to hear what pleases you? Sheesh!

In any speech, on any subject, the speaker has to use terms, theories, or at least language that others can use as a starting point to tune in to the subject. Even poetic metaphors use terms like,,,"like a". See, I just did it! It doesn't mean squat whether there was a big bang or not, it was just a reference point. The fact is, whether it is a seed of a tree, or a human sperm cell, there is a basic "plan" contained in that seed that unfolds and manifests as a living being. And if you look at all the species on earth, and how they all need each other to create a balance,that is even more mind blowing....And it is all contained in that seed! Hence the theory of starting in complexity.

Then, as the speaker says, this new,different kind of complexity emerges based on the collective consciousness created when we all interact,building a supercomputer that we can't come close to building in a factory yet. So this counters the complexity to mosh theory, as this new, uncharted complexity slowly, but surely becomes capable of creating the complexity (the seeds) that gave birth to it......It is the working towards completing the circle, giving more creedence to the secret we keep from ourselves.....That we are becoming gods! Gods capable of creating the seeds , and I'm sure many other things we can't even fathom in our Earthly stupor, under this veil!

We have to forgive ourselves for needing these reference points to bring the listeners minds to a starting point, but right now, we still have to do it this way to "collect " the minds in the room, so we can move forward together.....

I find the way everything on Earth contradicts itself to be very humbling, like a reset button whenever I think I have something figured out! Thanks for the post Gary!

I understand the situation and the observational conclusions, to be just as you have stated them Todd. It's kinda the forest for the trees syndrome. Good lord, if we can't discern and keep track of what the discussion is, we don't have a hance.

Wendy, I understand about the being "tied" situation. I want to say, I have never posted with impatience or anger and I have always wanted to and will continue to try my best to "get along". It will not always be that a post is viewed and aspects determined and judged to be in the same manner as they were given. That is unfortunate and sometimes merits being called to the attention of the perpetrator. Thanks for your time.

Noa, I have never posted with or out of impatience or anger. Not sure where we go from here as they are the determinations fueling your remarks in my post

True, Gary, I didn't view the entire video. I turned off after his "Big Bang" discussion and missed the "Collective Learning" part. Having just viewed that part, I actually find it most interesting. Thanks for the post.

Hi Gary,

I'm sure you have the best of intentions. Yet I question your comment about never posting with impatience or anger. I read your above comment to Noa "Can you think of any reason for my second post other than your judgemental and scornful display of condemnation towards my assumed and injected, impatience?" That certainly comes across to me like you've got some anger or something going on.

I would love it if we all did our best to recognize that every person here has a beautiful heart and is doing their best. If we all post from that place and treat each other with love and respect, I suspect we could make more of a difference in our lives and world. I love you, Gary, and I love everyone here. And I would be thrilled if we can all find our way to ever greater love and support.

With sacred love and warm wishes,
Fred

Let me start by saying I watched the whole presentation. At the 2 minute mark he prefaces his commentary by saying, "In a Universe, ruled by the 2nd law of thermodynamics". This will always send up red flags for me because it presupposes that the whole Universe is governed by that law - I do not IMO believe that it is. This is simply the conventional popular status quo position of today's by-the-book physicist. This is not to say it is not true. I just believe wholeheartedly that it is not true for the whole, but very much true for the 3D physical part we exist in and navigate.

He sees the phenomenon of the physical world and universe, and then in typical human projecting fashion, presumes that understanding upon an unassuming and quite unaffected Universe already in progress on who knows how many functioning levels and dimensions not necessarily bound to the physical laws we have come to understand - presuming that complexity can only thrive within perfect "goldilocks conditions" as per his understanding of conventional physics.

I strongly contend that not only is there much more going on in the whole of the Universe or Universes, but that the 3D physical part is a very small "phenomenal" fraction of the greater whole.

At about the 4 minute mark he states, "and why complexity means vulnerability & fragility" just prior to taking the audience back 14 billion years to the alleged beginning or big bang. And it is clear that he is not using the big bang theory as an attractor to bring the conventional audience along toward another idea about all of this. He is speaking as a conventional physicist would to a room of students about the conventional understanding of the "physical" universe, or that part of the Universe we can see and presume to understand. This is IMO a limited understanding at best, and he never once says anything that would lead me to believe he knows that it is a limited understanding at best.

This reminds me of how often science and physics becomes their own religions which tends to impede new understanding and knowledge. This IMO will finally be transcended when discovery brings a new and better understanding that the Universe is not necessarily bound to the viewable physical phenomenon or the 2nd law of thermodynamics or the law of entropy, that the physical part is simply a product, one of many, of the whole that makes up what Terence McKenna called "a novelty engine".

IMO to truly understand the Universe more fully, one would need to know what existed just prior to the big bang. And one would need to incorporate and integrate the knowledge that (IMO) time and energy and matter did not necessarily exist just prior to the BB and are simply "tools" for a new experiment, byproducts out of thin air from an already fully functioning novelty engine already in progress. One must at the very least entertain the possibility, if for no other reason but to exercise one's ability for critical thinking and thinking outside the box.

It is so dominately human (nature) to project upon the whole with such limited understanding & knowledge, and to literally blind themselves with the dominate notion that they really do understand the whole thing based upon their limited knowledge at present. This is how science and physics sometimes becomes religion masquerading as true and complete knowledge and understanding.

One need only remember the other past claims that have been put forth with the same level of certainty seen in this video: that the earth is flat. that the earth is the center of the universe. etc.... How could we possibly think for one second that we are not still suffering from the same delusional misunderstandings that have plagued us in the past, conventional status quo understandings that are now known to be so utterly silly in comparison to what we are so confident of knowing now?

I promise you, we are not done looking back and seeing the same silly nutball stuff! Should we just stop trying to figure out the rest of Life and Consciousness on all levels in this amazing novelty engine and just concentrate on our own little part in the big picture?

That's a question for another discussion I suppose....

One thing at the end that did get my attention - after stating earlier "and why complexity means vulnerability & fragility", he finishes by talking about what we are doing to this planet and ourselves in the process. What he may have been doing the whole time is setting up for a dire warning about what will happen to our precious physical world and the existence we know if we don't do something about how we are literally trashing the place and making it uninhabitable....

Fred, I bet if you try hard, you can see that I simply stated exactly what it would take to say I was being impatient, when I was'nt. I have a playful nature. I like to poke and prod my friends and family to get their attention, make sure they're listening and make contact so we touch personally. I also love to distract them from their distractions. It's my way of getting people to pull back and lighten up. I always use silliness and humor with a certain amount of pestering for distracting them. Sometimes it starts off irritating them, which is how I first gain their attention, but invariably they end up smiling and laughing. If you notice the two posts that Noa refers to have a tint of humor and are my playful prodding. I know this because it is intentional. The reference to Bueller and the second guessing of mhhe rewatching the video, I thought was funny. So, knowing exactly the nature behind my posts, then Noa's judgments and suggestions about what she invented to be impatience, my response to her is just a truthful account of what it takes to make that kind of blunder, not anger. That's basic shit, things are not always what they seem. Her determinations and assumptions also are indicative of how she views me and how she views herself and her role here. Very telling and to me, not so flattering.

Bob, thank you for your reply. I'm glad you found it interesting and couldn't agree more. It hit me like that too, in a kind of ah~ha, powerful way. You are the man fur doing what you did. You have my respect my good man.

I almost quoted Nassim haramein earlier,,,Years ago, at some gathering of physicists he used a balloon to demonstrate the expanding of the universe,,,then asked the question,"who blew up the balloon?" ha! I thought that was about as good and as simple an example as any as to our limited knowledge ...And then he added,,,everything we have created is based on blowing shit up! as we have focused on the expansion, which couldn't possibly be more than 50 percent of the equation...

I was trying to pick his idea out of all the traditional beliefs he used to set it up. It seems that his using those theories as a base really turned off a lot of people. I understand why, as we seem to be right in the middle of realizing how little we know, so any mention of anything now in question will tend to get a new idea thrown into the pot with it..

To me, everything in the world contradicts itself, based on what level it is pondered from, or what side of the brain is pondering it,ha! And your mention of our "laws of physics" only being valid in this dimension, or,"our part of the universe" is a great way to put it.. It can be so humbling to realize there are so many possibilities

and the sort of thing happening here is why I didn't post or stop in here much for a long while. I'm not taking anyone's 'side' or commenting on the above video. My comment is ...this is why I suggested group meditation, because going off on a tangent after a post like this separates us all and there is enough discord elsewhere in the world. Transformation is what I come here to support not everyones ego. So my addition to this particular group of posts is a repeat from my team meditation post Wednesday

I am releasing judgement, forgiving myself and all others, inviting in healing, asking my Higher self to connect with your Higher self knowing us as the Healing and Light of the world.

Bring us the wisdom to understand our power in bringing Light in. I take responsibility for my own bit in bringing peace in as well as for any chaos I have previously created.

I choose peace instead. Now.

"More life to all, less life to none. More freedom to all, less freedom to none. Every human soul was created with the power to create with the law of life and when creating with the law of freedom they will be prospered."

May we all prosper and may we be peaceful even as we promote transparency in all areas of this portal and our own 'worlds'.

Thanks for those warm and inviting comments, Onesong. May we all find more ways to love and support each other.

And Todd my dear friend, thank you for being you and being here. You are always a breath of fresh air and a relief. You truly are the Switzerland of this site...

Noa, this isn't about men and women. The way you choose to comment for the whole time I have known you on this forum comes off as very condescending, presumptuous and pretentious, and would be the same whether it came from man or women. I find it disingenuous and evasive for it to be reduced to just being about men v. women, or women v. men. You just couldn't be more wrong.

A few years ago you shared with us an experience you had with someone around where you live - this was in the context of you trying so hard to just love and help people and they were being mean to you, saying mean things to you - why does this keep happening to me, etc.. You spoke specifically about a woman saying mean things to you to your face when you were just trying to help her and love her. I remembering thinking that if you could only hear yourself, how you talk to people, you might understand why this WOMAN (not a man) was responding the way she was.

I just stopped trying to explain it to you long ago because you kept using left brain rationalization to support and sustain your way of thinking and acting. I also now suspect that your last comment in this thread about men and women reveals that you are projecting, that you may have a problem with men period - or a few men from your past. I would bet the farm that you had some experience with maybe a father or grandfather, husband(s) or someone who made an impression on you at an early age and you are copying their behavior.

I promise you, the men on this website do not have a problem with you (if they have a problem with you) because you are a woman. If anyone has a problem with you it is because you talk down to people as if you were somehow in the know unlike anyone else and they would do well to listen to you.

It's a real turn off, from male or female when people do that. I had a problem with Riversong (male) early on here because of the very same pompous nonsense. And I have been guilty of the same. You are now considering the possibility of leaving this site. Please understand that I am not gratuitously bashing you - You say you're just being honest, well these are my heartfelt honest feelings and thoughts I have in relation to the way you come off in many of your comments. I have not been back to this site very much primarily because I get so irked when I see how you comment to others, how rude and condescending and disrespectful of the others here, as if you were somehow the authority. You come off as a bit of a bully and appear to be proud of it somehow. Again, these are my impressions, my experience in relation to your choice of communication. This is not about bashing you.

What appears to be true and constant is that there is always going to be someone who gets under my skin. Ultimately that is my problem to solve. The same goes for you and for everyone. If you decide to leave this community, remember your experiences here and see if the same thing begins to happen at the next community of people you engage. That should tell you something about where the problem lies and how to solve it.... We draw these things to ourselves by our own behavior - we become attractor for the very things we wish would stop happening, and go on to further delude ourselves by imagining that it is happening to us for no good reason...

What would be so cool is if you stayed here and began to treat others with more respect. You will be pleased with the results wherever you finally decide to do this I imagine....

I just want to simply state that I disagree with Chris and Gary about Noa. I don't want to create or stir up any more conflict here but I felt it was important that people didn't take silence as agreement. I am praying to Jesus for a healing. I only ask that my relationship with all here be healed. Sorry if these words might also offend some here but if it helps, this is a technique that I learned from A Course in Miracles and I have frequently found that it is helpful.

Its all just opinions and personal takes on things - no one is right or wrong. just that when I hear someone complaining about the way they are being treated when I have seen them do the same thing, it bugs me. In the end it is less than nothing.

More on the male and female thing - everyone has male and female in them. I am more like my mom than my dad to be sure. And the other thing that struck me after posting earlier is that my dad was an authoritarian that took himself way too seriously and I was always put off by him - we did not get along to say the least. And Noa's style reminds me of my father and that can get under my skin very easily.

Doesn't make Noa wrong.

When I think about it more, all of this is born of subjective variables - part male, part female, part this imprint, part that, and the unavoidable clashes that come with all the parts that crash into one another and try to make heads or tails of it, right or wrong.

Just makes me realize that all of this parsing of personalities is a complete waste of time.

Be well Noa, I'm opting out of this type of useless debate and will not be sucked into this kind of thing anymore. We all have to figure this stuff out and shoot for our own personal best without being distracted by the egotistical temptation to engage this spinning of wheels that seems to hurt more than it helps. We always go into it thinking we are trying to help, but it is a trick to be sure.

Reminds me of the movie, Devil's Advocate. He is not wrestling with the devil in that movie - he never leaves the bathroom mirror. He is wrestling with himself.....

I'm done. I've explained that I don't mean anyone any harm and I certainly don't intend to be condescending. I've apologized. And I continue to painstakingly choose my words carefully so as not offend anyone. I have worked hard on softening my approach on this forum - even Fred said he noticed the change - but some of you won't forgive me regardless of what I do.

One thing I will not do is lose my right to my own opinion. I don't feel like I'm better or smarter or worth anymore than anyone else, I'm just being me. You don't have to like me, but if you persist with your character assassination, then I must go. I can't continue to expose myself to this abuse.

Gary, a big difference between poking and prodding in person and doing the same in written form is that the reader doesn't have the benefit of body language and voice inflection to help interpret the intent of the message. That's why people often misinterpret each other's words on this forum. The door swings both ways.

So please stop bashing me. If I misjudged you, I'm sorry. I was not trying to be overly critical or to do you any harm. I wish you would give me the benefit of the doubt.

I'm out-spoken and honest, that's my nature. Sorry if that annoys you. You have no idea how hard I try not to offend anyone here. I choose my words very carefully, often spending half an hour or more on a single post. My opinions are just that -- opinions. Feel free to disagree with me, but you don't have to trash me to make your point. Why do you think you have the right to keep insulting me, Gary? Don't you know how much it hurts?

I think its telling that although Chris Bower's feedbadk is highly critical, it receives no harsh words from you. I've been reluctant to say it, but I've seen it over and over again for three years now... some men on this forum will not tolerate criticism from a woman, but will graciously accept it from a man. If this last comment hits a nerve, sorry but it's just my opinion. I'm not going to argue the point.

And BTW, Chris, before you attack me, I agree with most of what you said.

Because of the five men who have repeatedly bashed me on this forum, I no longer feel that the Gathering Spot is a safe place to express one's views. How sad. This place used to feel like home.

To the two women who just joined: I hope you feel less stifled here than I do.

We believe we're here to transform the world, and I guess we are. But we are the world! We so easily fall into the soup of me-and-you conflict. (I've managed to stay out of this conflict here, but I've fallen into plenty of soups, so I'm the same as everyone else. So if I happen to have some objectivity about this conflict, it's mostly circumstantial.) And as we are individually and together, so is the whole world as we have it. I honestly think that the only valid "position" is that of merciless but forgiving witness of self, our own part, our own inner and outer "stuff", and how we contribute to the big soup. It's ongoing, ideally, or whenever we remember, in reality.

Other people's reactions are their own; who needs to take them on, to believe them? I know from painful experience (as we all do) that it's often really hard to hear what other folks say, evaluate its validity or lack of based on what we honestly know by our own experience of things (including oneself), and then let the rest go as their stuff, for which they alone are responsible. Who cares about that? ...Well, it's a life's work.

There's a certain blessed (IMO) place to stand that's hard to find and hold (like riding a bicycle on a rope) but possible for all of us, and that's the place of not caring about what someone else thinks about this person -- but not caring with sensitivity to their hurt, their weakness. It's not about me, even if they say it is. (And it's not about them, even if I say it is.) They may have some valid insight and it's a pretty mature thing to accept that, but no one truly can know this person except this person. That's really solid ground to stand on. (Once in a while I actually manage to find it; I think we all have felt this at some time or other.)

So is it possible to lovingly say (not out loud for God's sake), "Frankly, [fill in the name], I don't give a damn"? Not that Rhett Butler was especially sensitive or loving, and I don't remember exactly what was going on in that scene, but his words are a reminder that disengagement can be useful and valid enough. The best time to walk away is when I'm starting to lose my balance at the edge of the bowl. Later is too late.

In any case, foregiveness all around, including for everyon'es own self -- without all the nice, spiritual words. It's not an outer act anyway. ...That's not the most popular soup on the menu, but... slurp...

This is why I don't"join". There is always at least one that feels they need to be sheriff. When people try to tell them what they're doing, they play victim and cry foul. When I post here it is most likely because I have got really excited. I love it when people get excited. I don't need to be reprimanded fur thaT our anything else for that mater. Noa, it seems you flipping a situation, works on a few people, but not me. I think you're a bully, period. Also, the first paragraph in your reply # 20 is exactly why you mighty want to refrain, don't you see? Later days. I officially .... unjoin

It seems that some posts, like this one, attract behavior in which people engage in finding ways to justify their opinions without really validating the feelings of those they disagree with. Sad. Where's the compassion, guys? Do you remember that everyone here has a heart and everyone wants to love and be loved?

With love and sadness,
Fred

E G O S This is what happened like Chris said there is no" wrong or right just opinion " don't let your E G O run your life. You will be much happier that way . I hope you all work this out if not I hope that you see the positive outcome from this experience and that would be the lesson learned from the experience .

Eric loves the world .............................................................

Yes, Chris said there is no right or wrong, but to Noa he said, "You just couldn't be more wrong." That says a lot. I have re-read the words of everyone on this thread, including mine, and I am learning a lot from them.

Thank you for your wise words, Bob. They give me strength to carry on.

You said in your above post,

"One thing I will not do is lose my right to my own opinion. I don't feel like I'm better or smarter or worth anymore than anyone else, I'm just being me."

I love that line because it can be afforded to all of us here - all of us everywhere. May we afford others the very thing we wish to retain and be afforded ourselves.

I bet we can agree on that...

Be in the Love and Light of the One, of the Infinite...

Ohhhmmmminnnnuhhhhmmmmahhhhh