Following Up - 'Mental Templates from Our Past'

What we see depends largely on what we have experienced.

You can be blinded by your expertise.

Follow-up of 'Mister Thinking-Cap' in post Horizontal Switch Technological Approach as of February 2011, some more from

Professor Allan Snyder, 'Centre for The Mind', Sydney, Australia, talking in Stockholm 2011:

Some excerpts:

... Very few people are able to do that after learning how to do the type 1.

... Once you see the Dalmatian it is very difficult to see the hyena.

... We attempt to reduce the top-down imposition of prior knowledge and we do that by inhibiting part of the brain

... and this we believe leads to a qualitatively different type of cognitive enhancement, one that is less dependent on expectations.

Some on results of the experiments :

... People are slower in labeling a group of things than they are at identifying the different parts that make it up.

... Once you know the lable you can't see the parts.

and also not if things, once in a 'box', might change; my comment. In times with so many changes it could at least be interesting to listen a little once a while to the 'other side' which is more free from predefined concepts.

But that is also only my humble opinion.

And as I liked it, from an interview see source below:

You see, advancing knowledge is very much a lower-down subset. Radically changing how we think about something, is quite different than incrementally advancing a field.

And if possible, connecting both and when one of the qualities is more needed, applying at the proper time the proper skillset.

As always, take care to put the pieces to the proper place in the puzzle. What we get is input - how we proceed it is ours. That's it from my side for a while, I guess. Might be I'll take some break ... so please go ahead, thinking and linking.

With love,
yours little autistic (well, I knooooow),
Lyn


Links if you feel for:
http://www.superconsciousness.com/topics/science/interview-professor-allan-snyder
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-03-impossible-problem-non-invasive-brain.html
http://www.centreforthemind.com/whoweare/index.cfm
http://www.centreforthemind.com/director/index.cfm

Finding of the Day - Trust

With half an ear following an episode on philosophy a night some time ago, some phrases in the discussion, due to a thought I need to follow-up anyhow, cought my attention:

Where there is no trust there is no betrayal. Betrayal is experienced only where there was trust at first.

Someone whom we don't trust can disappoint but can not make us feel betrayed.

['trusting can be betrayed, or at least let down, and not just disappointed',
Annette Baier, philosopher, 1986.]

Looks to me as if there was something about that, especially in this context:

Thus, people who rely on one another in a way that makes betrayal impossible do not trust one another.

Stanford Enyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP) on 'Trust',

Copyright © 2011 by Carolyn McLeod

When persons have closed up to never trust again to prevent feeling betrayed, they get into the well. known 'control mode'. They get cought in the funny idea that if they control, either themselves or the other, nothing bad can happen to them. They go that far that they get into believing they can control the elements, nature and whatever. Funny humans, indeed.

Most wonderful persons sometimes close up forever to avoid any kind of disappointing experience and therewith cut themselves also off from the chance to experience trust and what may come out of it. It's a cold world without trust. There are so many events that are beyond human control .... no matter how much people would like to plan and know what they get in advance. At a point, any of us will have to face the experience that in the end there is nothing we humans really can control.

It is a lonesome life to fully 'control' feelings to possibly experience, and it is a high price to control oneself and others, circumstances and feelings all the time just for avoiding any situation of experiencing the strong emotion of possibly being 'betrayed'.

It suppresses both life and feelings because these two are directly interconnected. Where humans loose connection to their inner feelings by constantly controlling them for the sake of supposed (!) 'reasonable' decisions, they also loose the ability to feel at all; the ability to feel themselves and therewith, to feel others. They disconnect internally and externally at the same time, and I guess that is the main reason why humans on this planet are hustling around but never get things done in sustainable ways.

Emotionality directly connects to empathy; by actively and constantly controlling emotions,  by giving them no place or space, humans loose empathy not only for themselves but for anyone around them.

When we enter this world it is natural to trust because we are born so completely helpless, so vulnerable literally that such we have no other choice but to trust. Born into whatever environment we trust in the persons who are our caretakers, our closest persons, and we don't wish to admit that they could disappoint or betray us ... because, literally and seen from the little animal perspective that we are as children, we would have to die in an environment where we can not feed ourselves or predators are only waiting for us.

We as nestlings are unable to survive on our own, we depend on a symbiosis with our caretakers. Often not realized as such, one of the deepest cutting experience for children is to be left alone or behind, especially at an early age, having not one or even better, more persons to totally trust that those will sense what they need when they need.

Emotional absence causes this fear in the very same ways as physical absence. For a child, both being fed and protected as well as knowing someone senses its direct needs are equivalently important.

Where children get no feedback on their emotional needs, they literally starve from inside.

If we think about that it was quite common not too long time ago to leave babies crying for 'strengthening' their lungs (or will, what an absurde idea), and put this into context that for a child it is a most frightening experience to be left alone, we can imagine what generations have done unconscentiously to their children. Sometimes there also simply is no way for caretakers to be there for children when they need, for instance when they have to deal with their own surviving in one or the other way (and if you observe cautiously you will find that even in our societies of affluence nothing different is happening at this moment). For the children that we all are, these contexts are not rationalizable as children are emotions only at that stage. Only later we can face again our fears and overcome. That is what most time of our lives is about - to become what we were meant to become when we came into the world.

Now have in mind that generations of children have grown up that way and could not know it any better. But that fear, that feeling of being frightened of being left alone, was never taken from them. If you read this text with opened senses and emotionality you might get to feel as and with the children - and with the child you and almost all of us have been. If you read it only superficially and still reject that feeling you don't want to feel you will not know what it is about.

I strongly believe that all children had had that trust when they were born. Especially generations where caretakers were due to whatever reasons disabled to provide availaibility and emotionality are definitely inflicted.

Is it a hope that experiencing betrayal and learning to deal with it is inevitable at a stage?

Our caretakers are not perfect as no one can be perfect, and many times even the most loving parents are cought in their own needs and often rarely know how to fill up their own gaps and holes, or how to make a living. They give us birth, accompany us for a period of time in our lives but are not bound to us as nestlings forever nor do they have the right to do so.

They have to let us go as we will have to let go our children - and they have to disappoint us, in the best case in good ways when in the meantime they have provided us with the preconditions and abilities by a strong and functioning personality to make it ourselves in life.

Where they did not have or develop such themselves, they also can not pass such on.
Then we have to track ourselves and find what we have been lacking.

It is not only inevitable but simply necessary that we are to leave this symbiosis at a point if we want to become adult and own, unique beings.

We can for long times live on our own, manage our days, our lives, our professional commitment .... and such learn to know what we are capable of, where our limits and where our borders are, too. We such can live as parts within a whole, have a lot of 'kind-of-relations' and peers which are never put at test because they remain superficial relations only, and they in turn rarely test us when we emotionally keep the distance and don't let them in, either.

Thus, we imagine that we live a life while we take care that we carefully exclude any unwanted feelings, such also never really touching the whole and what life is about. Such, we also never grow beyond our very first programmings.

Despite we collect many, many people around us, despite we gather merits or fame in profession, in groups or in society, there comes a point where we will find ourselves ... honestly ... alone.

People come to live in parallel groups, in parallel societies and universes where over all the time they come near, they fulfill functions for one another, they compensate, they run for hypes; they even spend a lot of time with one another but honestly, they never meet.

They become only 'functions' to one another. Objects. Paralleles that never meet or even touch.

The only way to go for more than that and meet, again, is taking the chance to open up and trust when it is given - no matter how vulnerable we will make ourselves.

It would be wise to take care that the person we choose is someone who will know to handle that gift of trust he or she is given.

If someone is trustworthy we will not know before we try. We need to open and take a risk. The risk is being vulnerable ... again.  Ready to deal with the possibility to again feel betrayed and re-awake the memories we have from childhood ... such overcome and heal it.

So when in times where everyone is busy only to care for him or herself, a special opening crosses our path - how would we react?

Would we try to keep it away, control the situation, and reject when we get challenged to deal with our very first experience of having felt betrayed?

Or would we be ready to forgive, to see the weaknesses we all have, all our human incapabilities - and take them into account, lovingly and benevolently?

Would we be ready to give away that 'full control'?

Would we be, again, ready to open up, and freely trust ... fully and committedly, and to put ourself into the position to once again become as vulnerable as a child?

In principle that's it, just a word on that kind of people who without giving any signs first that they are worth our trust do 'demand' us trust. There is always something wrong. What you wish for yourself give yourself first, as a quote says. So if you want to be trusted act in a way that is trustworthy, too, and also give trust yourself. It is a mutual thing.

Persons who demand you to trust but don't trust themselves keep the full control in their hands and the situation only by this is unbalanced from the start. They know how to place a carrot in front of your nose and then encourage you to go for it while they themselves don't move.

Trust can be given freely but it is evident that people whom we give our trust must be and act trustworthy, too. When we are trusted freely, it is ours to adequately respond.

And if someone who has by experience no good reason to trust nevertheless trusts in you - be aware that you are highly honoured.

Being trusted in turn becomes a chance to show we are trustworthy.


Not everyone is yet there to give also what they themselves would like to share. For getting ready people would need to get ready to look at and overcome their very own first betrayal in childhood, to realize and accept vulnerability and imperfection but also to lift the masks and defenses that are so commonly used.

The more we are unveiling old illusions we cling to because they made us feel secure, the more we become able to distinguish and choose for our very own lives ... and if that is only for learning to accept that at a point we also have to let this phase go, as a next theme is we have to realize that we simply have no control.

It takes courage and at the same time, it shows and grows the courage.

All we are is born from how we face and deal with preconditions we meet, not from how we have learned to swallow them.

Wishing to anyone including myself the ability to truly trust persons who are worth it. And wishing to those who are not able or ready ... to just waste some thoughts on it.
It is only the quality of your life it is about.


Lyn



For an interesting philosophical journey and if you feel for more, check out http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trust/ if you like so.


Inspired by my friend C., and a for me myself as well as a little bit dedicated to my friends B. and D.:
"Lynnie, you know I can listen to you and be there for you but this I can not take away from you. You need to get over this all by yourself and you know that a next time you need to be as open as that, again. "
Blessed be the wisdom of the heart and the heart that is there when it is needed. Thanks, C.

Neither 'Plane' nor 'Simple'

Tracking some more information on brain functionalities these days, in context with the Gazzaniga experiments I stumbled over a comment as 'the brain is much more complex than to draw conclusions about features of just the one or the other hemisphere'. 

Well: Of course it is. It is totally complex! That is what all is about! 

Every thing is continuously complex and when we are, or maybe I am doing so in a post here, examining an issue on one detail then of course it is clear that this is only one aspect which is part of and must be seen as one in complex interconnection in and with the a complete environment. In linear arguments, people like to nail you down to only what you have just said that moment. In an explication we actually would include everything that completes the picture of the view of the other side! Integrative thinking takes into account all information for finding the clues, not only the one just displayed.

Actually this is exactly the weak point in linear sciences and views. As any kind of linear thinking is doomed to stick to linear methods as the media they can use to pass on ideas and thoughts literally are two-dimensional.

It is just impossible to display depth, complex interconnectivity or multidimensionality of anything on two dimensions as a sheet, a screen or binary-dualistic language.

Certainly you also fell over that geek joke about

'There are 10 types of people in this world.
Those who understand binary and those who don't'.

Thinking exactly this way may function - if humans had the capability to include an unlimited number 'if-then-else'-statements in their thinking. Unfortunately, then they would not be able to finish even only one thought per day. So in a sense, binary, dualistic thinking does not function in practice. It functions for administrators only, and as their name says, they are there to 'ad-minister' (to serve to) while suddenly they took over and rule. Sorry, I couldn't leave out that remark on my favourite enemies ;).

Exactly this is why I am trying to point at 'switching on' (and to) 'another way of thinking'. Building the arcs, opening access to all those additional processors and integrating all there is to overcome functional errors of some neuronal islands.

We might slowly learn to listen to the inner processing output (and learn ro distinguish them from those voices implanted otherwise since we came into this world), we might learn to not 'overhear' but become aware of information which trigger us in certain directions as if we were ping pong balls, so easily blown around by any little breath of air.

Thus, we can decide to play the ball - or to be the ball.

The flatter the plain, the more likely is that the wind will play and toss the lightweight ball on it in its own way.

In the end it is a permanent process to extract and straighten each single knot of the confusion; then to integrate the new piece into the whole picture. And slowly, slowly ...

(Slowly slowly ... what? You will finish the sentence automatically, isn't it so? That's the fun with brains.)

Do you know this when you call for something, you ask a question and then you actually directly get it? So much dealing with 'right-handed' and 'left' thinking as well as what happens in shifted sinistrals (what a terrible word), I these days am facing an overly 'righthanded' work environment. Well, most environments in our Western culture are so today, in some countries it is even much worse, as is the time we seem to be stuck in. Hopefully not for ever. Where they think they gain they actually loose. It is personally painful to conscentiously watch this going on and on.

Additionally where I am working is fully a boy's world where boys (and eagerly adapting 'girls') play applying their 'boys' rules'. It is not easy but often funny at the same time to somehow keep countenance ... though sooner or later, I guess, I personally won't make it there. It is too big and too fossilized an environment. So I see it as a learning lab, a test environment in the full sense. It is so 'deja-vue' when you ask for a further-going information and they start 'explaining to the 'girl' the basics though that was just not asked. A woman can know much more  without having to look like or behave competitive like a boy or without even having to have the same focus as they have. A major problem for boys is that they are stuck in that 'stag competition stage', I guess, which includes that attitude of not admitting or letting show that you might not know something which creates an environment where the balance is held by submitting to the achieved hierarchical roles. Hierarchy always includes that others must be 'under' to be 'top'. Despite sometimes I can get dragged into such unvolontarily, it is certainly not for me. My decision. You will have made or will take your own.

If people would start to admit what they don't know by starting to ask and by such receive other and additional knowledge to expand their views, then they would also be able to step by step fill the information gaps and they would really come there where they with lots of waste of energy have to pretend to be.

When they need to behave as if they knew, in order to demonstrate capability or superiority - well, they are simply cheating themselves.

Even if you were the best communicator on the world - if someone has a pre-defined dualistic view or patterns, you could say whatever you wanted, you could even jump up and down in front of him (or her) to get them awake  to listen what you really had sais - or make them aware that what they 'see' on their inner screen is so different to what actually takes place. And still they would only see what they have displayed on the inside screen of their personal glasses, what is inside their very own boxes and schemes, and they will hear what is coming from inside their brains but not what tries to enter from the outside world. 

They will simply not see or hear. Maybe they think they 'must be right' to not be left (out, maybe). 'Right' is linear, and linear has more force - if applied to one point. 

They try to bring together the single elements, units and groups then by drawing lines between the elements as in diagrams and matrices. Each member is isolatedly functioning by definition of what is their task to do - and in everyday hustle to follow all orders just forgets about the original sense why that task is existing in the which context. Though everyone knows that those detached units need to be somehow interconnected it is done by again defining linear procedures for  interfacing. What happens is that always some linking lines are missing - or some are so overly regulated that they clearly don't know anymore their own rules. Greets to European Administration, by the way, and any administration any way.

The experience just confirms how much 'line thinking' is the fine art of separation and isolation. 

It is a good first step actually ... to analyze piece by piece. When the analyzed samples are in the next step well integrated, you'd just DO what is flexibly demanded by a situation. It is grown knowledge by integrated experience and unfortunately, in any linear discussion you will never make a point.

It is somewhat much more a 'miracle' that some organizations work at all to achieve an output like a complex product rather than it is logical to happen. In fact it costs much more energy than would be needed to achieve the same in an integrative environment.

Energy we would then have to create good times, agreeable and sensable environments. In small as well as on a large scale.

Just some thought fun springing up while writing this, and maybe a thought to follow up:

If the word 'man' and 'human', the latter mirrored from the Latin 'homo' (language changes vowels over time and space easily) is connected to the word 'manus' which means 'hand'. Then 'man' would mean 'hand' - someone who has hands to use. Let me play further - a 'monkey' could be 'little hand' in the same context - a little man, or as in Northern German languages: a 'Männeken'.

Then, what makes us special could be that we have 'hands' to use.

An piece of circumstancial evidence might be the reflection of the syllable in the name of the Mandrake, the mythical Mandragora plant. Maybe the picture of 'man' is related to the body, the root of the plant, as with the Ginseng. But maybe also to the fingers formed by the leaves. Just look at it and associate. Or not. Every move you do is always up to you.

Etymology is also only what certain people have tried to find out. Each day there are new findings and we should not get stuck in what we have been tought as anyway, our teaching system takes ages to bring through new evidence. Anyone can be wrong ... or we can find totally new ways to approach old phenomena. The human brain was not set up only a few tenthousand years ago, our deepest developments are much older, and we are to all that connected - willingly or not. That is why it is wise to go far back and deep down to understand what we are.

Or just live life alive.

In this sense, have good fun in the play today!

Lyn

Transparency; Inside, Outside, Mutual

Acting professionally extensively in information management for the last years, a good part of my job is trying to make people understand why it makes sense and is useful to everone in an organization that relevant information is transparently - vertically and horizontally as well as over time - available for everyone who needs it for his or her own function and functioning within.

What I am continuously facing are those persons who really do not want that this transparency ever happens. They want to hold relevant organizational information only themselves and only want to decide themselves whom they share it with.

They want to be in and own that power over information, even over the most ridiculous and unspectacular data, and to pass it on to only those persons they want to bind in as peers; such, they gain thankfulness by those whom they pull into their boat, an outstanding role in the group (Maslow 4 it was ... remember? Esteem needs: self-esteem (speak: ego), achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility (speak: power over others) and additionally some kind of assumed inalienability. In fact, it definitely 'functions' in reality as it is here.

They themselves and those who fall for those little tricks I guess mostly don't realize that, if you look at it in another way, that this behaviour only shows that people who act that way just prove that they lack exactly those and a lot of other qualities which would make them in such a role a contributive part for society. Accountability, for instance. Accountability anyway is some kind of 'out of fashion'. They lack integrity, too, as anyone who has to make up his or her personality by excluding others from relevant information - 'we and the others', a low-level social glue - just arranges himself in an herd animal state as one of those unmature stags who wants to get in power by all means. 

And: someone who needs to make up status, dominance or assumed 'mastery' in such ways perfectly proves that he/she has none of those yet achieved. Furthermore, and that is my view, it is a clear sign that that human is far from being ready at all for achieving the so highly desired attributes, and so they get cought in their own little hamsterwheel. Would be great they'd let that go. 

You may read a well-written article on the 'Dunning-Kruger-effect' if you like so as this gets quite interesting and explains a lot:

People fail to grasp their incompetence precisely because they are  incompetent.

And since, overcoming their incompetence would first require the ability to distinguish competence from incompetence, those people get stuck in a vicious cycle.

It is good to be careful not to place such people in any role where they may have power over others, as they are neither capable nor sufficiently e-ducated (guided 'out') to fulfill such. The main lesson is that the only real power we can achieve is the power over ourselves. 

Only when we are there then we would be able to also steer others well and in particular, unselfishly - fortunately for them but unfortunately for society, at that stage people have overcome that strong (animal) drive for such.

Power over oneself is totally the most satisfying power anyone can achieve. Driven are only those who lack; they end up due to their engagement and focus, and this time this is unfortunate for society, in the positions in organizations and in societies where they got something to say. Works best with linear, hierarchically organized brain-hemispherers.

The main reason why people keep information in seclusion is easily identifyable as shere power play, and honestly, in quite a ridiculous way. 

In organizations this attitude flourishes in the ways people do not pass on relevant information to any other colleague who should know - to let that colleague look stupid in certain situations and oneself being the first to act on something and 'know' -, which is not to my disregret meanwhile found to be a part of bullying techniques. Among children in a certain age there is the game 'I know something that you don't know' and somewhat in elementary school age, especially girls play that extensively. Normally this experience should be integrated and overcome ... and very often it does not as it proves so successfull at least in a world as we have set it up.

Inclusion/exclusion is the name of the game. There are persons who have learned that so thoroughly that they will not let it go later either.

In the end, the major social, communicative and interrelational-emotional problems always and only occur because humans do not evolve beyond certain stages of life. 

Some remain socially-emotionally 5-6 years, some 15-16, some maybe make it to the 20 year mark. For most, that is their absolute end of maturing.

A counter remedy could be lifelong learning ... but as I heard, that sprang up for a short while and became out of fashion soon, too.

On the other hand, there is information which certainly is not meant for everyone - especially not for those 'everyones' who would not know how to put it into a proper context or would abuse the information. The big question is only always: who is that to decide?

[At this stage also the 'what is abuse' certainly needs to be discussed further. Let me make it short:

Abuse is any action which instrumentalizes another being for only personal gains while the used 'object' experiences direct or longterm disadvantages.

That is my very own and simplified definition by turning around the also pretty plain standard:
 'Do as you like as long as you harm no other being'.

Wikipedia defines it similarly:

'Abuse is the improper usage or treatment for a bad purpose, often to unfairly or improperly gain benefit.

But then we again need to discuss: what is improper? What is bad? What is unfair?]



In fact, these two only superficially contradictory looking approaches need to be carefully distinguished: 

• information which belongs to an organization or organism as a society if not the whole global society
• personal information which relates to only private stuff.

To me, the whole arguments against Wikileaks' Julian Assange, when trying to prove that this delivery of 'secret' information is considerable as a crime - information which belongs to the world's people indeed if you follow the differentiation -  and at the same time accusing him for not allowing others to sneak into his private life, is hollow, stupid, and only shows that those people who enmesh the one and the other are cought in a completely immature stage of 'I know something that you don't know and this gives me power because I choose whom I share it with' while claiming to be capable of making the world go around.

But it is nice how they expose their own real level of integrity and maturity with such statements and trying to attack someone with points which are just childish. They show much more about themselves than about the target they have in mind and that should give us to think about who is indeed at which levers in our societies.

It is funny though to see that people freely deliver all their data to instances they do not know how those instances will use the information one day. These instances may be in fact exactly the boys and girls as described above ... look it up and choose freely yourself whom you hand over your self.

Information as language are tools, and any tool can be used by anyone and each time in a very different way.


Have a great day,
Lyn

Far from Over: It's Only Just Begun

Why ever this became the headline this morning when waking up with Freddie Mercury's song 'You're my Best Friend' spinning in my head, still running.

The amazing part is that communication happens on so many different levels, and we as being in the world wide web of nonlinear communicators often enough can not identify what's that that's coming up. The strictest to be avoided is any inter-pretation without sufficient background and distance.

As do reallife interpreters mess up a lot in communication and contort contexts (see Bible), so tendencially does the inner interpreter depending on stress and pool of information he/she can use for creating the picture he or she tries to explain. Therefor it is by far the healthiest to not interprete at all but let that what comes, explain. The only way to learn about those intuitive things. Unfortunately, it is not easy to not want to know what some inner knowledge is wanting to tell you. Sometimes the answer to the riddle comes within short time, sometimes it takes years. The only thing we may not do is thinking we know, and this is very good education for keeping information input just loosely together so that we can re-arrange the view when we receive additional pieces.

When you fall over interpreters of dreams, quick interpreters of visions, it might be good advise to be more than careful. The 'other side' is by far more complex than that it could be easily interpreted by a linear mind, and especially by people who are themselves cought in a certain mindset like fears, vanities or even self-unaware obsessions, who too quickly see their presets as proven (while the information wanted to tell them something completely different). Evolve intuition and listen to its soft, almost unhearable voice. It can be trained; that takes some efforts, time and awareness. Most of all, it cannot take place in a distracting or noisy place. It needs a good part of time to 'collect the self together' and 'clean mind' regularly.

I may believe that worded language is translated in the left brain hemisphere only or mainly; this is quite likely and meets with personal experiences as whenever I go into very deep things I never have language for that or it would be a terrible stuttering and if so, I prefer the much clearer though most people confusing language that expresses much more in proactions which are highly connected to the whole being as might be painting, lyrics (as they have rhythm ... a reason why almost all magic follows rhymes which activate the connection), or just physical expressions.

People who try their luck with schamanistic stuff should be the most careful as they themselves might be cought quickly and get controled by what they wanted to control - this also holds for all the (black) magic used in so-called 'legal' churches and unconscentiously by their followers and supporters.

What the ego wants is most often most contradictory to what the self wants and needs.

Check out the basic meaning of the term 'Sha-Man' if you like so - then you get what shamans are supposed to be. A precondition of any 'magical' work is the synchronization of the brain hemispheres and to bring the frequencies to a particular condition set or 'mode'. Which frequency that is you must ask the left-brainers who are good in putting things down to linearly understandable media though always know that no one can catch multidimensionality on a plate. If we are called, we are not called to use the gift for our egos, dear. We may understand the richness of what is given, act in it, but always in context with the whole. Who does otherwise secludes him or herself from it. It is a humble path, not one to exalt oneself.

Maybe not the most beautiful, no perfect pic but
beautiful to me: thanks, lily, I love your kin

Anyhow, back to my song: I won't interprete it and will just let it flow, and there will be reason why. It feels great and today is a beautiful day, another day that is given as a personal present if we want to understand it in the very best way we can. When there is not so much beauty around in some moments, we still can lift the tiny, the little beautiful things that happen there and look at them as little daily miracles. Another one of my lilies opened, this year in red ... the grubs that made my plants suffer last year are almost all sorted away. My little garden is my very own metaphor for how my life goes; if I take care, it flourishes, if other distract all my energies, my love and my resources, it also falls apart. The world is a garden, too, and the smallest is in the whole while the whole can be seen in the smallest and most tiny representative. And I cherish the people who take the time to take care of me these days I need.

Thank you, dears, every One.

Some people still have lots of work ahead to get rid of their bugs. Where the intention is to lift the soul, too often the ego and the dragons to which the ego clearly is connected, step in with heavy artillery. While the soul cries, and for those who can hear it yells, the tank takes over and dictates the driver. The tank, by the way, can't really see where it goes: too small are the slits for the eyes, and if a plane, it often simply is too fast and too far away to see what's going on on the ground. As we might be aware of, the IFF (friend-and-foe identification) systems quite often fail. As I love metaphors and if you can identify the parallels, you might check out this sentence from a war tec advert: 

'The new Mode 5 interrogators and transponders have been in development for the last six years with companies including [...], all producing Mode 5 systems for use on military aircraft [...]. BAE and Raytheon also produce Mode 5 cryptographic appliqués that store the secret keys and will be used to support flight-line testing of the aircraft systems.'


Well, store the secret keys ... in machines on mode 5 systems.

If we would re-al-ize, we also would realize that it is us who would be better to have all keys in our hands.

Dragon power and dragon magic always drew people under their spell. Probably some people are also aware of that the whole industry is happily flourishing with the business to take over thinking for the people, and you can be sure it will be and is sold to the population as 'technological progress'. The dummies, and that is what most of our population despite (or maybe, due to) a high level of e-ducation has become, will certainly swallow it that way. Grounding and at the same time being able to rise high is not a paradoxon though at all.

Again, it is us who need to be aware that it is us who need to take care what the tools and the technologies we invent are used for.


This leads me to something I wanted to point out for some time, as again, it might be differently interpreted:

When I call the ways we live, man and women, how families or societies live 'a war', I of course mean the equivalent of how  our evolutionary nature reacts on a physical war without trying to diminish any of the effects of the latter. 

The reason is that both of these forms of violence trigger the same effects in the human psyche or call it soul. It is ours to learn about, clearly pull out and move away from it and overcome. Having experienced both forms personally, and having additionally experienced some insights by being in a revolution and a war even though not deeply affected (luck), and having had to do a lot with people who did, on both sides; that's why to a certain degree I know why I am making this statement. Where I don't know, at least I can distinguish stories by sensing, a skill that functions by re-cognizing which in turn requires a cognitive process. We need all our abilities to 'connect'.

People with psychological wounds can not heal if they keep on being exposed to the violent environment same as a physical trauma, which always is a violence against the soul additionally, cannot be overcome when people have to stay in that. The latter is known by now, fortunately, the first is still a taboo, as when we would look at these effects closely, we would have to immediately question the ways we live all along. The worst that can happen is that we adapt to a sick environment. Blessed in this case the people with adaption disorders;

Past has regularly shown that adaption to a destructive system only creates destruction, latest when the lid is taken off the steamer.

In Europe, for instance, the effects of the last World War are still rumbling in the generations after. Who does not want to see this must be blind. As just one of many many examples where such pours (or poors) out: not so long ago going by airplane, I got into a smalltalk with the (adult) boys besides who actually looked quite nice and friendly at first sight. After a little and a totally non-triggering conversation, the Dutch (adult) boy who visibly had a severe ego problem (despite or because of the academic title he pointed out within that short talk and which, of course, does not interest me at all) stressed that 'fortunately we have no war nowadays', pointing at my nationality (though neither my identity nor heritage which clearly is global) as a German (and forgetting that we have many, many wars around the globe these days, constantly).

In second generation after that unholy episode which shook the continents, it seems that at least the West-Germans have worked up much more than any other country even if not to the very end, and had been undertaken a permanent brainwash to make the generations after be aware of that 'guilt'.
Some clearly have worked up some more and some less, of course; but what is evident is that the rest of Europe obviously has not as it had been so easy to declare the guilty one - a symptom which seems to recently become refueled. If there is good reason, I am fine with speaking out openly what's on one's mind and I am the first to blow the whistle in my very own environment (which does not bring me many friends but those who are affected will at one point understand). But if it only is an unprocessed ex-pression (ex-pressure would be to the point) of something people want as a to a holy grail stick to, I am not. Any thing and any information need to be analyzed, so puzzled apart, to be put together, synthesized, in the ways the picture slowly gets somewhat more complete. Lack of broad knowledge is not a help, certainly. E-ducation should definitely be the opposite to in-doctrination - but check out where we stand, yourself.

Even many European countries only very recently achieved halfway democratic systems, and every society, its culture, tradition and history, has of course formed their inhabitants and members. Having been working in that European organization til last year, I was shocked about how deep the trenches in fact are. And shocked about what narrow views the 'highest'educated' people can have (and the bad manners), too.

Additionally, I found out just these days and to my very surprise that several countries in Europe as there are France (where incest between consenting adults is not prohibited), Sweden (not prosecuting incest between siblings and farther relatives), Spain and ... The Netherlands legally allow so-called 'consentual incest'  between parents and kids. The age of consent is mostly everywhere defined with 16 years.

The latter I had until a very short while ago thought of as at least some kind of Northern-Europeanly civilized but found to be totally wrong.

Reading through some platforms where actively concerned persons write, mainly the involved 'consentual children' party, the Daddy's girls and Mummy's boys, it gave me pure horror about how deranged, how severely deformed humans can be ... or become. I am not into discussing this from a 'moral' point of view. It is more an ethical thing, and we all make our sexual experiences in different ways and sometimes went wrong to find that we were wrong, simply by a last or at a point evoked healthy repulse and/or cleaning reaction re-calling us to deal with it. Call me prudish if you like so (and I know I am certainly not) but in my view, also taking into account the more than difficult to overcome entanglements that anyway exist in 'families':
if sexual intercourse between parents and their children from age 16 on is somewhat tolerated as a norm, it gets difficult for both parties to draw lines in good ways - and stay mentally sane.
If that is the glue that keeps societies (and families) together, I prefer to emigrate respectively stay on my island.

When you see into what status of lack of health these (now adult) children are and to what they deform, showing openly that 'self-aggrandizement' of cheating the same-sex parent, how superior they consider themselves over the  original adult partner ... it is shaking and it becomes clear that it is a problem that affects mentally and the whole personality. The persons involved though don't have the feeling that anything is 'wrong', to the contrary. I do not think that legal acceptance does make it easier for people to step out of such entanglements, enmeshments and terribly destructive bonds, and it is evident that the persons involved suffer from low self-esteem anyway already beforehand but feel boosted and superior to all the others by doing what they do. They bond even more as they 'share a secret' which differentiates them from the rest of society plus they can create a 'common enemy' when anyone comes near to touch that secret - another type of dysfunctional but quite longterm-functioning social glue which creates the illusion of safety within a group. Like drug-addicts they have found a ventile for living out their sexual thrill without even leaving the house and without facing all those challenges that would make them grow and mature.

Why I deal with this? Why does it concern me? First, I know how terribly hard it is to get out of suppressive systems to have a little chance to start becoming oneself. Second, sexuality in itself is a huge source of creative power - and what we use it for makes a difference. When this center is injured, occupied by persons or psychological entities who got nothing to fumble there, violated or corrupted, humans always run strange ways until they get it cleared. The other point is that these people can not create good - they must interfere, reject, oppose and overthrow any good that comes into their lives, that others create and what they leave behind is a lane of destruction, a desert where for a while nothing grows, as their trace. In real life, they run around like any other people so it is really hard to detect that kind of spirit beforehand. Most times, we must have experienced and seen it to believe.
Certainly you also did not want to know that 'in Japan, it is not uncommon for mothers to sexually stimulate their children to soothe them so they will sleep. There have been stories in the press of mother-son incest arising from the strong nature of this relationship in Japan and the important maternal role of ensuring the son succeeds at school. According to Hideo Tokuoka, "When Americans think of incest, they think of fathers and daughters; in Japan one thinks of mothers and sons" due to the extensive media coverage of mother-son incest there'.
(Source Wikipedia, Incest ^{[61][62][63][64][65]})


Do we have to wonder about the difficulties of men and women to become such at first at all, and if they manage the first, to find good ways to inter-act with the other? Painful games continue on and on, and people who have been going for loving and being loved fail, close up, end up with loading their pain on others again.


I closely knew a man once  who had been 'sexually initiated' by a female housekeeper at the age of six - plus some additional stuff but always things are co-related and not one event makes us break, just many, the undermining of our innerst knowledge and if we find no one to function as a kind of lighttower for at least some kind of orientation. That guy never found his way in life, was anti-social and any healthy human coming his way was the same way destroyed as he had been destroyed, including he lay a most unusable fundament for the children he 'produced' all around, as he additionally followed, unconscentiously as it usually all happens, to realize his mother's dream to 'have a child with blonde hair'.
People do not realize what they do to others ... and sometimes it is difficult to find out who is the active part and who in fact is the abused part. I also know a Dutch father, highly intelligent but a slave to the active manipulation of his daughter and he simply cannot re-act or act in any healthy ways to her clearly sexualized approaches and how she steers him, same as he can not keep a healthy distance with any kind of women who similarly play on him. He certainly feels uncomfortable but doesn't get it managed to ensure healthy and clear relational messages. Part of and woven into the context of an environment where systems sustain systems and where something already must have happened to him at an earlier stage, he only tries to do what he has been tought what is 'right' and without daring to take over a mature role in the system that in itself is is wrong - and consequently does all wrong he can. Maybe it is a kind of punctual view - but maybe, it is in accordance with all signals that were sent, just to the point. Actors in such games have the tendency to leave marks, either for help or for showing off how grandios they are. Time will show the truth, anyway. Allways.


A sign of tolerance? Or simply a sign of decay and degeneration which form the people while it is the people who in turn form society?

It is certainly not of advantage to be blind on one eye, and another good reason to activate and integrate the 'left' (but right) brain hemisphere.
But first of all, to learn to say 'no' to the persons who deserve that 'no' and also need it for their own sake; and not close out and flee the truth.


We must be very careful what we chose as role models - also in political contexts.
A Europe that is based in so many regards on the lowest standard is certainly nothing to actively go for.

And as is easily to see, we all should start to clean up by sweeping around our own front doors.

Physical war and the ideas people get in there to use against people, the total loss of empathy, the pure instrumentalization, the treatments people act out physically on other people though have their origin in the minds and psyche of the same.

Without a psyche that is first subdued to a 'war mentality', in families, in educational systems, at workplaces, no war would be going on. Psyches are broken before the humans are old enough to act in wars ... and there is the connection: it is in the ways we educate our children, it is formed by the ways we live relations that in the end cause wars, psychically or physically.

And that is why it is of so much importance personally to me to end both of them, while it is clear that the psyche must be the one to steer. Not the tank, but the whole, grown, inside mature 'man' and 'woman'.

The very personal part in it is that for quite a while, due to personal experiences, I had kept myself in a world that consisted of females only. It was not healthy for me to mingle with men, I knew, and I first had to work up my experiences of my past. As mentioned, you only can heal when you step out of what made you ill ... and then, and only when you are ready, you are ready to face it anew. Trauma knowledge - and we all have traumata, believe me. Traumata passed on from the generations before, traumata received and well-buried within our souls at a time we were not at all able to express. If we would be complete and intact human beings we as humans would not act they ways we do. Just in a next step, with a very fresh sight, in some regard open as a child, the last two years were my personal advanced lessons in how females in fact interact. That is why, as starting to write this blog here just with last year, it somehow looks as if I had something against females. I have nothing against women, though - I just don't find so many. Being blessed with the opportunity and open mind to extract  the essences from different cultures which I needed at time, carefully sorting which parts are usable and which certainly not, and one by one integrating so to come to a view which certainly does not fit into any box anymore, I during the last two years got my lessons certainly about where we really stand in Europe regarding respect and equality.

Equality is namely also not what happens in The Netherlands where a bestseller 'Why Dutch women don't get depressed' states:

'Once married, however, sex often took a back seat; for some early Calvinists even sex within marriage was sinful, de Bruin says, and Dutch women sublimated their sexual energy into domestic bullying.
"They ordered the men around - there are many stories of bossy women and subordinate men," she said. "We know this from the literature of the 16th century, and it hasn't changed."'

Well, clearly. Degrading and supressing men instead can also function as compensation. Unfortunately, it is not what I or any bilateral respect-seeking woman may understand to be equality or emancipation at all. Build the bridge to the stuff more above if you like so. Individuals often think they are so individual ... well, they can. If they first get out of the old programming and create a new by choice, not by inheritance due to some stupid circumstances which we are born into.

If it was not so serious for the inflicted, it would be a joke, resembling that statement by a teenage Dutch girl

'I am playing with my father's balls'. 

Certainly, Dutch humor. Can't be otherwise.

Those who think they have the least problems actually have the most, and those who reject the most, will never come to a point where they can become humans - at all.



On the ways people behave in both physcial and psychological wars, a source I recently tracked through a quote received by a good friend:

“Violence is a disease, a disease that corrupts all who use it regardless of the cause.”

“There are always people willing to commit unspeakable human atrocity in exchange for a little power and privilege.”

“A culture that does not grasp the vital interplay between morality and power, which mistakes management techniques for wisdom, and fails to understand that the measure of a civilization is its compassion, not its speed or ability to consume, condemns itself to death.”

And some I personally feel with because it also fills me as also my resources decrease from time to time (and we always need one another for re-surrecting):

“Hope has a cost. Hope is not comfortable or easy. Hope requires personal risk. It is not about the right attitude. Hope is not about peace of mind. Hope is action. Hope is doing something. The more futile, the more useless, the more irrelevant and incomprehensible an act of rebellion is, the vaster and more potent hope becomes.

Hope never makes sense. Hope is weak, unorganized and absurd. Hope, which is always nonviolent, exposes in its powerlessness, the lies, fraud and coercion employed by the state. Hope knows that an injustice visited on our neighbor is an injustice visited on all of us. Hope posits that people are drawn to the good by the good. This is the secret of hope's power. Hope demands for others what we demand for ourselves. Hope does not separate us from them. Hope sees in our enemy our own face.”

“if we don’t rebel, if we’re not physically in an active rebellion, then it’s spiritual death.”


All quotes by Christopher Lynn Hedges found on goodreads.com.

I guess that was quite a lot ... didn't want to go for so much, it simply went on flowing.
Pick out and trace, process (or progress) what you like and what you think is 'right'.
It is a gorgeous day today.


Take care and thanks to All,

Lyn