appreciating the desire of the ego

Desire (Geri Halliwell song) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Most of my life so far, I have claimed that desire is my enemy (or said something like that). Of course, it was a bit of a lie.

I have tried to control desire, but that is desire, too. Desire is of course the reason that I claimed that desire was my enemy. I desired to have desires other than my actual operating desires. In other words, I desired to suppress and repress and re-direct my desires.

That is what society does to organisms. Societies socialize organisms.

Societies glamorize desirelessness and curse desire as shameful and dangerous and evil. It is. Society should do what society does. However, just because desire is demonized, that does not mean that desire is not also valuable.

I was hiding desire to protect it, to save it for later, to hide it from those who may have found it terrifying (or at least inconvenient) – perhaps because they were terrified of their own desire. Or, maybe their desires conflicted with mine so they punished and suppressed my desire.

But we cannot be free of desire. Desire is our vitality. We can hide it or suppress it and that can be useful to survive, but even desiring to be free of desire is a form of desiring. I am free- free to have desire and free to hide desire and free to claim that I am not free and that my freedom is trapped by my freedom and by my desire and by any claim that I may claim to claim.

North America and Pelican Nebulae (narrowband) (Photo credit: DJMcCrady)

I claim that you are also free. I claim that you are free to hide anything and deny anything and claim anything.

 

 

 

 

 

Related articles

• We contain Multitudes (marlmarly.wordpress.com)
• egoic and organismal consciousness (ecoinitiation.wordpress.com)
• A Larger Us (womenofspiritandlight.wordpress.com)
• Observe the mind with the mind (depthcoaching.net)
• What is a Soul Contract? (the2012scenario.com)
• What is a Soul Contract? (nalonmit.wordpress.com)
• This can’t be…. (theflufffreejournal.com)
• THE WORLD IS NOT OURS TO PILLAGE AND PLUNDER [Blog] (themoecashchronicles.com)
• Freud – You’re Mental! (socyberty.com)
• Gloria Wendroff – The Heaven Letters – Like The Tides Of The Ocean – 28 March 2012 (lucas2012infos.wordpress.com)
• The Ego Is a Screamer, But That’s Not an Orgasm… (luckfawyers.wordpress.com)
• Fragments anticipating the sixth and penultimate death of the author (aaronasphar.com)
• Enlightened Beings ~ Giving to Get Versus Giving to Give (aquariuschannelings.com)
• Ending Ego Enmity: Making the Ego an Ally. (elephantjournal.com)
• One Little Thing (learningmaster.wordpress.com)
• Frankenstein (meroveeschild.wordpress.com)
• ID,Ego and Super-ego (zazenlife.com)
• [AUDIO] Full version of Big Bang’s “EGO” & “Feeling”! (ibigbang.wordpress.com)
• Memoirs of an Ego: When Keeping it Real Goes Quiet! (memoirsofanempress.wordpress.com)
• 3 Ways to Go Beyond the Ego to Your Destiny (directyourownlife.wordpress.com)

 

Personal Finance (Photo credit: 401K)

 

my amazing new life

the simple secrets to an amazing life of happiness, health and wealth

secret #1: WHAT IS LANGUAGE? Language is a part of reality that is distinct from all of the rest of reality. Language is a specific category of human behavior. By language, I mean the entire realm that includes all symbols, codes, pretenses, claims, contradictions, falsehoods, nonsense, beliefs, controversies, arguments, and secrets. Outside of that definition of language, there are no such thing as symbols, codes, pretenses, claims, contradictions, falsehoods, nonsense, beliefs, controversies, arguments, and secrets. Those developments only form through the use of language. 

secret #2: WHAT IS LANGUAGE FOR? Language is simply a type of behavior used for influencing the attention, perception, and behavior of other people. It has absolutely no direct influence beyond that- like on the temperature or on the heat of the sun or on the speed of a car or of the rotation of the earth or the combustion of oxygen or the metabolic biochemistry of cells.

secret #3: HOW IS LANGUAGE RELATED TO AN AMAZING LIFE? Language is the source of amazing results as well as the source of the 3 claims that we use to inhibit our results: I couldn’t, I shouldn’t, & I wouldn’t. People can trade for happiness for resignation (“I couldn’t”). People can trade health for cynicism (I shouldn’t”). People trade wealth for pride (“I wouldn’t”).

The core 3 secrets:

secret #4: “What I couldn’t do” inhibits happiness. Happiness is a function of power. (Imagine something that someone has said “makes” them unhappy. Can the “source” of their linguistic claiming of unhappiness be framed as “I am unhappy because I couldn’t _______?”) People can trade for happiness for resignation (“I couldn’t”).

secret #5: “What I shouldn’t do” inhibits health. Health is a function of acceptance. (Imagine something that someone has said “makes” them unhealthy as in “makes me sick” or “makes me ill” or “makes me ill at ease” or “dis-eased” or “stressed out” as in “totally disgusting” or “completely unacceptable” or “just should not be!” Can the “source” of their linguistic claiming of illness or ill will or unwillingness be framed as “I am unhealthy because I shouldn’t _______?”) People can trade health for cynicism (I shouldn’t”).

secret #6: “What I wouldn’t do” inhibits wealth. Wealth is a function of freedom. (Imagine something that someone has said “prevents” them from being wealthy. Can the “source” of their linguistic claiming of their poverty be framed as “I am not wealthy because I wouldn’t _______?”) People can trade wealth for pride (“I wouldn’t”).

(Before you proceed to the experiment below, you might find the attached image of interest. As you read each emotional pattern of relating to something, notice if any particular pattern of behavior comes to attention as you review the various ways of emotional relating.)

Image via Wikipedia

Experiment:

part 1

list a few things that people can’t do. (it could be for any people or all people)

list a few things that people shouldn’t do. (it could be for any people or all people)

list a few things that people won’t do. (it could be for any people or all people)

part 2

Take the list of can’ts. If people took that list of claims of “can’t” and made them in to claims of unhappiness, how could they do that?

Take the list of shouldn’ts. If people took that list of claims of “shouldn’t” and made them in to claims of unwillingness or illness, how should they do that?

Take the list of won’ts. If people took that list of claims of “won’t” and made them in to claims of poverty, how would they do that?

part 3

list a few things that you have ever said “make” you unhappy. (complaints/blame/justifications)

list a few things that you have ever said “make you sick.” (rationalizations)

list a few things that you have ever said “prevent” you from being wealthy (excuses)

part 4

Take the above list and explore some alternative claims in language using the following forms or templates. List at least 2 answers for each item on your lists that you consider to be realistic and relevant answers. You can include some silly answers (why not?), but only count answers that you actually claim to be realistic and relevant toward your minimum 2 for each item.

If I could, how could I ______?

If I should, when should I _______?

If I would, why would I _______?

Related articles

• Babel No More: Inside the Secrets of Superhuman Language-Learners (brainpickings.org)
• If there’s a connection between linguistics and other sets of symbol systems (losthighwaytimes.com)
• We May Be Less Happy, But Our Language Isn’t (scienceblog.com)
• Millionaire Mindset Secrets – 7 Secrets of Wealth Creation Released (prweb.com)

In the beginning, LANGUAGE!

Image via Wikipedia

In language, there are labels of isolated categories that are not really isolated except in the symbolic representations of language, like boundaries and lines on maps that are really only “political” boundaries with no physical boundary like a fence or wall. Imagine opening the door of a building and leaving that doorway open and then talking about inside and outside. When the door is open, what boundary is there between inside and outside?

The language of the label “inside” or “outside” references an imaginary boundary, that is, a boundary that only exists in language. Even when the door is closed, the boundary between inside and outside still exists in language, though certain sensory organs (eyes and brains) may not be able to perceive visually through a closed opaque door. However, sounds from outside can be heard. While inside may be distinct from outside, the two categories are not really isolated. Indeed, they are contrasting partners which only exist relative to the other.

What is the boundary between the front of the hand and the back of the same hand? Where is the exact boundary between the hallway and the living room or the left side of the room and the right? Language forms those boundaries.

Further, what if all boundaries in language are primarily just in language? What if “I am blowing the clouds with the wind” is just as legitimate a claim as “I am typing this” or “I am spinning the electrons around that nucleus?”

Image via Wikipedia

I say that I go here and I go there, but that is because language is for communication between humans. I may not say that I beat my heart and send my blood cells around to various destinations, nor do I say that I am assembling some proteins or spinning some electrons around a nucleus. However, all of that is just as much “my activities” of my “I” as this typing and the “me” doing the typing, as well as the reading of the typing and so on.

Indeed, without all of that biochemistry, there would be no typing at all. Further, I may not say that I spin around the axis of the earth nor that I am revolving around the sun, but I am whether or not I say so.

Language is a bunch of labels assembled in to claims, rather like amino acids assembled in to proteins. It is

Image via Wikipedia

possible for language to form in to the claim “here is an I who has a choice and here is what I choose: to spin electrons around a nucleus.” It is possible for language to form a pronoun called me and for many thoughts about that me to be formed: what I am doing, what I choose, why I chose whatever I claim to have chosen, and so on.

In the beginning, there was the living word (the Logos), and the living word was with the perceiving of God, and the living word was the perceiving of God. So begins the Judeo-Christian New Testament with the opening verses of the book of John 1:1.

Related articles

• More Musings on Wittgenstein and and the Nature and Limits of Language and Logic (theologiansinc.wordpress.com)
• Toddler Language Development (enfamil.com)
• Rule No. 1 (shanarose.wordpress.com)