There is no conceptual limit to positivity

[clapstyx]

There is no conceptual limit to positivity so why couldnt genisis have been an extremish manifestation of it ?

 

Heres the thing though, it could be that because we have been on a tangent of global progress that has destabilised the future of the ecosystem, during a period of time where there have been people negative to the idea of saving the planet that there will come a time when both the frequency of realisation and the scale we think on changes such that we develop a scale of thinking of equivalency to the scale of thinking neccessary to save the planet. This will mean that there will be an accelleration of positivity which may surpass the level neccessary to achieve a positive global outcome.

 

If we think of positivity as a continuum that is open at one end (because it has no conceptual limit) it could be that as the global situation becomes more dire that the accelleration of positivity becomes really huge crossing the thresh-hold of what was required for the initial enactment of genesis.

[Vox]

There is no conceptual limit to positivity so why couldnt genisis have been an extremish manifestation of it ?

 

If you have created concept of positivity in your mind you have also created it´s contrast negativity. Do you assume that "light will win over darkness" in this battle or vice versa ? if you force postive concepts eventually you force also negativity. if postive as concept do not exist ..bye bye negativity..you can not choose one without other.

[clapstyx]

Come now Vox you can be more sincerely universally perpetually mindblowingly more positive than that if you apply the full scale of the potentiality of your imagination and harness that to the imagination of every other living thing in existence so that it is stable in fractal compound through all time in every moment of time to to the equivalency of true soul mate love.

[Vox]

Come now Vox you can be more sincerely universally perpetually mindblowingly more positive than that if you apply the full scale of the potentiality of your imagination and harness that to the imagination of every other living thing in existence so that it is stable in fractal compound through all time in every moment of time to to the equivalency of true soul mate love.

 

Imagine, there is smile lurking between the lines, due sheer joy of discussing this topic;)...I was just using this approach to highlight positive and negative relation in thinking..if you think what is the state when you are not either positive nor negative concerning something, would you consider that you are not "in joy". From my perspective when "artificial thinking labelling" of postive or negative have been reduced away..real exist will manifest, and that is joy, joy being alive, being aware. Then you can add thinking as tool along awareness and use it and likewise being able to put it aside, when thinking is not needed. Compulsive thinking needs to label all things either positive or negative and that, to be honest, is a drag.

 

I would separate 3 layers, thinking feeling and loving. Thinking consist concept of postive and negative, feeling could be considered as emotional thinking also consisting postive and negative, but love in it do not have postive or negative division. As you can not think yourself to be in love , either you are in love or not. Love is a state on being? Not build up from contrasts positive or negative?

Edited August 11, 2010 by Vox

[clapstyx]

Yes agree boxing things off as varying degrees of positivity can be a drag.

 

Your first reply was interesting though because your not the first person that I have come across that has this notion that for the universe to be in order negativity must be present. I dont yet see where this notion comes from but by all means if you wish to argue the case for negativity then go ahead we may explore some new mindspace.

[Vox]

Yes agree boxing things off as varying degrees of positivity can be a drag.

 

Your first reply was interesting though because your not the first person that I have come across that has this notion that for the universe to be in order negativity must be present. I dont yet see where this notion comes from but by all means if you wish to argue the case for negativity then go ahead we may explore some new mindspace.

 

My own interpretation is that our thinking mind is not fully capable seeing the unity of things/events. it sees things separate.. One simple example; if you take rubber band between your both hands and just move you right hand, you might say that rubber band is getting longer only one end. Naturally it is getting loger equally within..it only seems that one end is getting longer (increasing only postitive).. our thinking has same kind of illusion when talking light/darkness/good/bad/positive /negative.. they can not exist without opposite /contrast or separte alone. Labelling things in thinking level are not effecting things at all. It is good to remember. When "things" look bad or good to you, are they any diffrent though?

[clapstyx]

Lets define this a bit more totally. Are you saying that strongly positive cant be related superlatively positive but instead must be related to stongly negative because the latter is a more meaningful reference point or do you relate "strongly positive" to the point of neutrality?

 

Not that it matters I dont suppose accepting since we are in a time of positivity accelleration we should be looking to keep track of how extreme its becoming.

[Vox]

Lets define this a bit more totally. Are you saying that strongly positive cant be related superlatively positive but instead must be related to stongly negative because the latter is a more meaningful reference point or do you relate "strongly positive" to the point of neutrality?

 

if you define superlative positive, then "dynamic range" also extends to superlative negative. Naturally you can select whatever point between as relative point. I would like to take a closer example; There is definition/sympton called bipolar disorder, now, if I undertand correctly these people have more strong "moodwings" from positive feeling/thinking to negative feeling/thinking. Curretly there is chemicals as medicine which seems to limit the swings of these experiences..but these medicines limits both positive and negative, like it should, due this is just same basic emotion which manifest as depression or manic behaviour. Who know more can describe more detailed /ellaborate description concerning this condition. But how medicine effects is the key. "Dynamic range" of the emotion is limited so extreames are cut from both ends. This also relates to peoples frustration when they are living so called "safe life". The exitement and thrill is limited as also the deep sorrow. Emotions are capped from both ends..

[clapstyx]

If I understand your (what may or may not be)logic then if there is no conceptual boundary limit to positivity you would say that there must be no conceptual boundary limit either for negativity..am I right.

 

Positivity by your account would be completely out of control if it was for some negative force keeping the universe all neat and together. I thought the idea of "How could we know the true joy of love without experiencing some meaningless suffering" went out ages ago. Its like someone saying "you cant know the true love to the standard of Jesus unless I torture you first"

 

Do you have a fear that negativity will increase if positivity does?

[Vox]

Your first reply was interesting though because your not the first person that I have come across that has this notion that for the universe to be in order negativity must be present.

 

I would provocatively say; All what is , is always in order , "Universe" is never out of order and if it would not exist, it would not exist, perfectly, without any flaw

 

Losing an illusion makes you wiser than finding a truth. ~Ludwig Börne

 

The observer, when he seems to himself to be observing a stone, is really, if physics is to be believed, observing the effects of the stone upon himself. ~Bertrand Russell

[Vox]

If I understand your (what may or may not be)logic then if there is no conceptual boundary limit to positivity you would say that there must be no conceptual boundary limit either for negativity..am I right.

 

Because humans are the ones who are defining / creating concepts, we can also decide the bordeline concepts. We can even have a conclusion and define something as a fact and definitions how this fact is found to be fact and so on. But what exist, exist regardless of our concepts in our thinking.

 

Positivity by your account would be completely out of control if it was for some negative force keeping the universe all neat and together. I thought the idea of "How could we know the true joy of love without experiencing some meaningless suffering" went out ages ago. Its like someone saying "you cant know the true love to the standard of Jesus unless I torture you first"

 

That is not what I mean. If you are capable of strong positive emotion you are also capable of strong negative emotion, that is my point. You do not need to go and check another end before you can experience the another. Rest assured, it is there ..

 

Do you have a fear that negativity will increase if positivity does?

 

I would say no, due no thinking or emotion will last. Only "certain" is the change/cycles. If you observe your thinking or emotions they tend to fade away faster. I do not know why but personally I have observed this. If you let youself to be immersed by any specific thinking or feeling it will "hijack" you true being. That should not be the optimal state. You should be able to reset/align to "center" after any thought or feeling. Then there should not be any fear due no stance set either way. If your target is to become "happy" your fear will be that you will not be happy. So fear was created when target to happines was set. Allow you to be happy but do not try to be....

Edited August 11, 2010 by Vox

[clapstyx]

Sounds like you have been deeply thinking about the perfect state of non existence. Careful you dont manifest harmony to that! :confused:

[Vox]

Sounds like you have been deeply thinking about the perfect state of non existence. Careful you dont manifest harmony to that! :confused:

 

Consciouss thinking is not "deep", it is just arranging symbols and concepts in our minds to certain patterns, "not thinking" is one´s sinking to the depths of exist..:D

[Vox]

Sounds like you have been deeply thinking about the perfect state of non existence. Careful you dont manifest harmony to that! :confused:

 

Just bumped into this one, you might find it interesting..

 

Dan Gilbert asks, Why are we happy? | Video on TED.com