what would it take to change a position one believes in...

This forum is intended to cater for topics that do not strictly relate to the book "Thiaoouba Prophecy", "She and I", and other closely related material.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
ET-1
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:46 pm

what would it take to change a position one believes in...

Post: # 12215Post ET-1 »

I've been wondering about what would it take to change a position one
believes in no matter what ... This issue came up in a dialogue with
someone else. I wonder what it would take for 'you' to change a
position 'you' believe in no matter what... maybe it be that ultimately
nothing can actually change a position one believes in no matter what
(be it right, be it wrong) and still I do wonder if there be something that
can actually change a position one believes in no matter what and
maybe help discover ways to actually embrace whatever be the better ways...
User avatar
ronald
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: 日本

Re: what would it take to change a position one believes in...

Post: # 12216Post ronald »

throw away positions and believes, makes room for the truth that lies beyond
User avatar
ET-1
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:46 pm

Re: what would it take to change a position one believes in...

Post: # 12217Post ET-1 »

ronald,

Me I welcome the truth wherever it be... sort of conscious that to get to it I must embrace the position and belief that be congruent with the truth and allow for the other possibilities without having to make them all be realities... I hold that in reality some possibilities ought to remain as possibilities while some possibilities ought to become also realities. If the truth we embrace ultimately depends on what we believe, throwing the beliefs out, would take the truth with it... Besides how do we know if we are making room for 'the truth' or allowing space for 'the truth that lies' :-) (humorous punt intended from the possible word meanings) ... Seems to me that discerning what be the actual truth be at the crux of the matter... especially if we are seeking to know who is right and who is wrong... Maybe the puzzle should be worded " I wonder what it would take for a certain position to actually consider an uncertain position"...no matter what... or for an uncertain position to become certain no matter what... which reminds me of an exercise that involved the insight of it being possible to know with certainty the path to follow while uncertain as to who tells the truth and who lies.

Thanks this gives me food for thought...
User avatar
BlueHaze
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: what would it take to change a position one believes in...

Post: # 12219Post BlueHaze »

An experience is worth more than hundred speculations. Besides fear of taking the wrong path, or sometimes even taking the wrong path is necessary for learning. Through re-evaluation we can again come to fuller understanding.

If one wishes to read experiences of others before taking the first step I would recommend "Adventures beyond the body" by William Buhlman. I think the introduction of the book already fits this topic very well.
User avatar
BlueHaze
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: what would it take to change a position one believes in...

Post: # 12221Post BlueHaze »

... Also to further note that it's nothing new we are describing here, as getting past established beliefs has happened through out the history. For example it was a long held belief that blood does not circulate in the human body, this was not widely accepted until 1600->

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulatory_system

So perhaps one day it will be also accepted that we have an astral body besides physical body etc.. Even though our scientific instruments cannot detect these phenomena, it doesn't mean that we can't already study these experiences to some extent. For example gather the experiences of people that have had them (http://www.astralinfo.org/obesurvey.htm ... %20results) and that way we can already draw some conclusions.

So for example reading "Adventures beyond the body" (or any other book on the subject) and comparing to my own experiences I already have verified that certain cohesion has to exist, as I have verified similar details through my own OOBE experiences. Thus belief turns into reality and it's not just belief anymore but certain level of knowledge.. This again brings to my mind the preface of TP, "believing is not enough, you need to know"..

PS. Don't think I'm advertising the book or anything, I only chose it as an example as it's one of the books I've read recently and I also felt that it suits the topic quite well..
User avatar
ET-1
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:46 pm

Re: what would it take to change a position one believes in...

Post: # 12222Post ET-1 »

BlueHaze,

I like the name you choose to use... and as you pointed at the end of your posts, YES lets be mindful to understand both the examples we each choose to use and the topic as we dialogue on the topic and the examples... seeking better understanding each and all... In that light:

What I am asking would be - How does one change ones experience when one's experience depends on ones experience which keeps the needed experience to change from being experienced by one?

I realize that the preceding general form framing may be a bit convoluted...
Here follow some examples of this general form - applied to particular cases:
-- How does the depressed experience happiness when the depression keeps them enslaved in a vicious cycle of depresion?
-- How does the ignorant experience knowledge when the ignorance keeps them enslaved in ignorance?
-- How does the fearful experience peace when they be afraid even of the peace?

I choose this last example because I have also been wondering about shifting away from the need of the negative say fear or making mistakes. Evidently much of the examples I have expressed above uses 'negatives', for it seems easier, still I believe and hold that the idea that we need fear or the wrong path for learning may well stem from the wrong path...

In a bold way, in optimally the possibility of being right and being wrong can exists whiles the reality of being right is and the reality of not being right isn't ( that is the reality of not being right exists just as a mere possibility; while the reality of being right exists both as a possibility and as a reality). In the past I have had this 'same' dialogue between the relativists and the absolutists position... I find humorous how the 'true' relativists has to denying their relative position: be it because they deny the absolutist position and thus not all is relative, be it because they accept the absolutist position... while the absolutists can accept the relativists position and become both an absolutists and a relativist by holding that the relative truth be the absolute truth... (of course also holding that the absolute truth be the absolute truth).

BlueHaze, I agree with you that "Through re-evaluation we can again come to fuller understanding"... well assuming that in the re-evaluation one actually learns something to attain more understanding, some may just reach the same understanding they had! Which may be good, if they already had full understanding or which may be bad and prevent growth (if they still have something more to understand and missed the opportunity to get fuller understanding). Much of what I write can seem a bit convoluted because of the idea that what is stated also applies back to what is stated and my attempt to make statements that apply to all positions within the same framing. For example if I state 'there be no absolute truth' I create a claim that denies its veracity... because the absolute claim that there be no absolute truth wouldn't be. Something akin to what happens when i state 'I did not make a choice' even though in fact and evidently in reality 'I chose not to make a choice' be it explicitly or implicitly. When I state "'there be absolute truth' I have made a statement which happens to be congruent even when there be only one absolute truth (that being that 'there be absolute truth' be true for at least one case)

I know that getting past established beliefs has happened through out the history, I am wondering what helps this to take place in oneself and in others. I once was in an extensive dialogue where I in essence set out to change someone else's beliefs in order to have them and me jointly explore something and expand a given field of study. Mind you it was within knowledge management. For the record changing beliefs was not the core reason to get into the interchange, it was more in tune to discover what actually happens to be independent of what individuals believe to be. Sort of a quest to better understand and know knowledge to better manage it. My strategy was quite simple: Create a share model that incorporated all positions to then be use as a tool and basis to determine what happened to be. I was going to develop a shared language which incorporated all beliefs to then use to show who held valid beliefs and invalid beliefs. This so that we could get past individual belief barriers and into actually exploring the expanded field of study. It was kind of like seeking to settle 'what the book said' by first creating and agreement to actually use the book in question and then using that as a tool to see who's claims agree with the text, in order to dialogue about what the book said... Evidently settling 'what the book said' by what we recalled from memory or what we thought to perceive instead of actually going to take a look at the book to see if this or that agreed with the book opens many possibilities to err. (part of the learning I had to do to deal with dyslexia, perceptual and cognitive conditions we all have to some degree). The exercise was both quite successful and somewhat useless for it enabled me to learn quite a bit and get past beliefs barriers without actually resulting in leading into the exploration desired. There I learned about belief languages and how to sort of translate between them. Now when someone who is wrong tells me I am wrong I can understand that I just might be right and when someone who is wrong tells me I am right I should reconsider what being right implies...

Since then I sort of been wondering - How does one change (for the better) ones experience when one's experience depends on ones experience which keeps the needed experience to change from being experienced by one ? Especially when what one experiences depends on what one believes and experiences and other limited ways instead of what be infinitely better...

To move a bit into the Body Experiences , believing and knowing... I have accepted for quite some time now that we have an astral body besides the physical body, (the notion of mind body spirit comes to mind). That present scientific instruments cannot detect certain phenomena to me is somewhat irrelevant. For me the real kicker isn't whether belief turns into reality ... that be whether dreams turn into reality ... and it's not just belief anymore but certain level of knowledge... But how one changes the dream from within the nightmare to make it be a wonderful experience for one and all especially when in reality there be those that seek (knowingly or not) to keep the nightmare going and few believe that they can actually change a thing.

Cordially ET
Post Reply