Just color yourself the world beautiful.
Yesterday, I fell once again over the highly interesting perception that people like to see things as they like to see them.
Illusionism in perfection.
If you try to wake up people because you see: the circumstances are not at all as they would like to color them, they start the big attack. It costs the world a lot to deal with the outcome of those illusionists.
Though it would be so easy to see what is there, to see what you have, to see what is lacking, and just do it. Better, of course.
Companies and organizations run risk assessments, business assessments, all kind of assessments ... and none of that would make any sense if people keep on dreaming and dwelling in as they want to see things which has got absolutely nothing to do with what and how things are in fact.
There is spread by some psychologists that being in love resembles the symptoms of a psychosis. In that state we see things from the most positive point of view and leave out seeing what we do not like to see. Now, and I must add this, being in love is certainly something different than loving. When loving, you as well see the little defects and mistakes of your dearests, and still love him or her. Because we all have our little mistakes in some sense even if we always are challenged to do it better. The question is only if these mistakes harm or hurt any one else - or harm or hurt even the person itself.
The psychologists' 'psychosis thesis' is quite nice because if being in love is seen this way, I would always like to be in a psychosis. Especially in a joint psychosis with my dearest when we have switched from the being in love mode to the really loving mode and still enjoy this joint sensation.
What now with all those people who are only in love with themselves?
Well, here we again face the problematic of differing between the 'self' and the 'ego' and using the proper terminology. And as stated before, there is no solution to this dilemma yet as the English language uses 'self' describing a re-flection on the original point. Conclusively, the question (in question) must be: what is the original point? Is it the 'self' - or is it the 'ego'? Then the question sounds already different:
What kind of collective psychosis do we face with all those people who are in love with their egos, and who lack all empathy with any one else?
As referred to before in my blogging experiment, the majority of relations, even close and seemingly 'loving' relations, have absolutely nothing to do with love. Love as a term is (mis)used for so many estates that today most people have no clue anymore about what love is at all. They think loving a girlfriend or boyfriend or partner is love, loving a child is love. Loving you dog or cat is love. Yes, it can.
It can be love but is not necessarily love.
The bonding with a child can be love, but also can be only the reptile's program to ensure the species' reproduction.
For example, believing to love a partner can be love but can as well be just be
Well now, color yourself the world.
If you are caught in the believe that reptile love and/ or animal love is real love, you well never go for solution 3. At first, you must learn to see.
If you believe that your organization or company runs fine because
People who did not wish to look at things in time to be able to take appropriate measures in time, do right things in time and before everything turns brittle and attracts the lice (plant lice and sometimes pubics, too) only, never allow themselves the chance to learn about the powers of creation.
We can create our world
so that it shines
from inside and itself.
No ego-self but real self.
Track what and who you are your self.
And then ...
we don't have to color it differently than it is
as as it is,
it is o.k.
Yesterday, I fell once again over the highly interesting perception that people like to see things as they like to see them.
Illusionism in perfection.
If you try to wake up people because you see: the circumstances are not at all as they would like to color them, they start the big attack. It costs the world a lot to deal with the outcome of those illusionists.
Though it would be so easy to see what is there, to see what you have, to see what is lacking, and just do it. Better, of course.
Companies and organizations run risk assessments, business assessments, all kind of assessments ... and none of that would make any sense if people keep on dreaming and dwelling in as they want to see things which has got absolutely nothing to do with what and how things are in fact.
There is spread by some psychologists that being in love resembles the symptoms of a psychosis. In that state we see things from the most positive point of view and leave out seeing what we do not like to see. Now, and I must add this, being in love is certainly something different than loving. When loving, you as well see the little defects and mistakes of your dearests, and still love him or her. Because we all have our little mistakes in some sense even if we always are challenged to do it better. The question is only if these mistakes harm or hurt any one else - or harm or hurt even the person itself.
The psychologists' 'psychosis thesis' is quite nice because if being in love is seen this way, I would always like to be in a psychosis. Especially in a joint psychosis with my dearest when we have switched from the being in love mode to the really loving mode and still enjoy this joint sensation.
What now with all those people who are only in love with themselves?
Well, here we again face the problematic of differing between the 'self' and the 'ego' and using the proper terminology. And as stated before, there is no solution to this dilemma yet as the English language uses 'self' describing a re-flection on the original point. Conclusively, the question (in question) must be: what is the original point? Is it the 'self' - or is it the 'ego'? Then the question sounds already different:
What kind of collective psychosis do we face with all those people who are in love with their egos, and who lack all empathy with any one else?
As referred to before in my blogging experiment, the majority of relations, even close and seemingly 'loving' relations, have absolutely nothing to do with love. Love as a term is (mis)used for so many estates that today most people have no clue anymore about what love is at all. They think loving a girlfriend or boyfriend or partner is love, loving a child is love. Loving you dog or cat is love. Yes, it can.
It can be love but is not necessarily love.
The bonding with a child can be love, but also can be only the reptile's program to ensure the species' reproduction.
For example, believing to love a partner can be love but can as well be just be
- the reptile's program as described above, including breeding, upbringing of offspring and individual survival or
- the stronghold within a group developed to ensure the human species' survival, the funny animal part in us.
Well now, color yourself the world.
If you are caught in the believe that reptile love and/ or animal love is real love, you well never go for solution 3. At first, you must learn to see.
If you believe that your organization or company runs fine because
- the stronghold within it is built on animal bond interrelations like personal networking advantages which even force you more and more to color circumstances and events and persons differently than they are,
- instead of being built on a joint goal and vision and useful purpose of what you all do and work for together,
People who did not wish to look at things in time to be able to take appropriate measures in time, do right things in time and before everything turns brittle and attracts the lice (plant lice and sometimes pubics, too) only, never allow themselves the chance to learn about the powers of creation.
We can create our world so that it shines
from inside and itself.
No ego-self but real self.
Track what and who you are your self.
And then ...
we don't have to color it differently than it is
as as it is,
it is o.k.
No comments:
Post a Comment