“The secret of contentment is knowing how to enjoy what
you have, and to be able to lose all desire for things beyond
your reach." - Yutang
Lin
Mike,
A thought provoking quote for me.
I think I hear the concept of contentment in many of your
statements regarding consumption and that
the media attempts to create desire.
I also think I hear you say that many of the messages we
get from @BS attempts to convince us that we
can reach any goal if we will just work hard or smart or
enough.
How do you (and others in our group) work with people to
evaluate if their DESIRE is WITHIN their REACH?
John
I think that is a good question:
How do you (and others in our group) work with people to
evaluate if their DESIRE is WITHIN their REACH?
BUT!
I'm not sure it's the right question @F-L-O-W!
I admit, the question seems like a relevant question, but
let's play a game @F-L-O-W, rather than @BS.
These kinds of questions @BS are designed to be without a
definitive answer, and therefore @BS serve BS: a system design
to promote perpetual consumption.
Remember how the quote went by the Lehman Brother's Investment
Bank Paul Mazur?
The words of Paul Mazur, a leading Wall Street banker working
for Lehman
Brothers,
are cited: "We must shift America from a needs- to a
desires-culture. People must be trained to desire, to want new
things, even before the old have been entirely consumed. [...]
Man's desires must
overshadow his needs".[2][3][4][5][6][7]
When I studied the eastern traditions, there was a distinct
"desire" to eliminate desire (go figure), which I have since
relegated to the group of 1-5% who will be happy/contented
when desiring no desire! (Always a koan for me).
One of the pieces everyone has to understand @BS is that the
opsys main goal is to create a perpetual loop, so that at each
level of quantity, there is more quality, and at each level of
quality, there is more quantity, so mobility is the key @BS,
move a level and you feel like you start over again because
everyone at that level you just reached has "mo betta" than
you, so you are back to the striving game.
The design @BS is to increase consumption, which is a
postulate of growth, and it works, especially when you salt it
with credit and economics conducive to growth.
My goal @F-L-O-W was to shift the assumptions.
Shift them away from this perpetual growth engine and
substitute happiness for success--which is a really tough
gambit because money can buy love, therefore success has a
strangle-hold on consumptions.
Now, your seemingly "right" (innocuous) question:
"How do you (and others in our group) work with people to
evaluate if their DESIRE is WITHIN their REACH?"
Back to my opening salvo: Buddhism @BS.
[Remember hybrids are MUCH stronger in everyway than pure
systems, this was proven out in my Animal Breeding Studies
@Texas A&M and so far as I have experience is still true today
in every form of "combinatorial effect."]
MOST of what I have seen from the Buddha was the rejection of
DESIRE, it being the sole factor in all things evil--so to
speak, so the idea was to eliminate desire.
The hybrid here, "suggests @BS" that knowing how much desire
is the "right desire" (right action) is key, but that is
foolhardy, because at EACH LEVEL OF EXISTENCE, the nature of
desire is different.
I have experienced this first and second hand, especially here
in the Philippines, where we take an opportunity to say, "help
someone on the street." They have nothing but the clothes on
their backs and a child (or 2) in tow, with the clothes on
their back, maybe a small bag between all of them.
What is their desire?
For a meal and after that, a place to get out of the elements
(sun, rain or crime)...
BUT THE SECOND, they are elevated to the level of need which
"magically" opens the Pandora's box @DESIRE...new needs
appear, that were NEVER THERE BEFORE.
TRY this on yourself!
Borrow money, get a landfall, or whatever, and what you
"thought" you needed will vanish in a moment of satisfaction
of those needs and NEW NEEDS pop out of Pandora's Box of
Desire--which is why the Buddha and in some cases Mohammed
indicated that the vanquishing of desire/progression was a
short cut to the promised land.
Christian religions pretend that if we just are rational and
love each other that everything will be ok, another foolhardy
set of assumptions based on the "rational idea" of human
existence, because it doesn't work either and REALLY plays
well into the hands @BS, because the fact that we can be
convinced (as your question roots from) rationally and that
there is a "rational" response is PERFECT ground for the
figure @BS!
Now, back to answer your question.
If you try to answer your question, you can't!
Perfect @BS.
Show me your existential level, and I'll show you the next
level of DESIRE @BS.
While your question is a good question, it's already rife with
BS, and therefore to rationally go there means you're going to
answer it @BS, and that's not what I am suggesting @F-L-O-W.
What I'm suggesting @F-L-O-W is to create an immune response
@BS and to question the question, as well as the quote for its
integrity @F-L-O-W.
IF it's @BS, then perhaps we need to rethink the question
before we dive into the answer @F-L-O-W?
That said, a good question deserves an answer (not such a long
one, but context really is important before swallowing the
hook, line and sinker, right?--that Happiness @BS is throwing
into the pond.)
Helpful Hint: In
transitioning from BS to F-L-O-W, we are going to have to meet
halfway and form hybrids, so we are going to address these
kinds of questions because MOST will not be able to handle my
(above) explanation above.
Action Step:
My short answer to your question in transition from BS
@F-L-O-W is to go back to the 12 Step Program for your own
MAP. While this is a transition step, it can help you. Using
the 12 Primes discussed in the book and adding in the 3
additional PRIMES from the SCAFFOLDING PILAR: acceptance,
attribution and recursion (iteration over and over as each
level becomes object, seek out the subject and recurse yet
another iteration of the approach, if its "desirable", hehe)
|
