Consciousness is all there is

[Soul_of_Shu]

Does what we do here matter and if so why? Answer that and not in large nebulous words but specifically why. And if it doesn't matter and the only thing that matters or is worthwhile is "out" there then why not take a large opioid overdose and get to it.

Of course it matters, because if we do things here in one ("inappropriate") way, we will suffer and make others around suffer, and if we do it in another ("appropriate") way, we and they will not suffer (or at least hopefully suffer less). So, no matter how "real" or "unreal" the appearance of the world may seem to us, our suffering or happiness when we do things in this world is absolutely real - it is what we actually experience.

And part of the reason why we do "inappropriate" things here is because we have distorted views and interpretations of reality, distorted reasons to do things in a distorted way. And this is where philosophy and spiritual practice helps - to clear the mind from our distorted misperceptions and miscomprehensions. Well, ideally ... Because what often happens is that people simply replace one set of distorted ideas with another similarly distorted one.

I basically concur with Eugene here. What seems of paramount value is the learning, growing, evolving beyond the confusion of maya which is at the root of suffering, and which materialism does nothing to address, serving mainly to perpetuate the confusion. If what is learned from the suffering doesn't reveal the root of it, then it just goes on and on indefinitely. Yet this doesn't mean that one must escape it 'out there' somewhere/somewhen, as it can be dispelled here and now. However, insofar as the confusion remains, and is just carried forward, as one embodied experience is exchanged for another, and we carry on none the wiser with all the suffering that entails, we're still left with some other version of 'here and now' in which to dispel it. As to how this all might be integral to some greater M@L-driven telos, I can't claim to know. I only know that it feels like the most meaningful, fulfilling, and somehow imperative aim one can attain, in this version of here and now. And who knows, perhaps be an example of how this is possible, for others to follow if so inclined ~ albeit this version of here and now might not be the opportune version for others, and can't be imposed by anyone else.

[Ed Konderla]

OK out of grins and giggles let's assume what we do here matters. Does it matter as 1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person or all of the above? A real life example. As an Instrument Electrical Supervisor I had a technician that was about a useless a human being I ever met and eventually I ended up firing him. I used to love to listen how he would pontificate about all of the taxes he had to pay for well fare and this guy with benefits was making about $90,000 a year in 1985 and if he ever accomplished anything it was by accident. Now my responsibilities in that position were broad and deep. So I ended up firing him for safety violations because at that time if you fired someone with a large oil company for being useless you would get eaten alive in court. So since I fired him for safety violations we won the eventual lawsuit and his violations were real. So I heaped a huge amount of grief and suffering on this guy and his family. I protected the safety of my other employees and peers and the surrounding community. I was able to hire a much, much, much more deserving and productive person. I brought a great deal of grief and pain down on me initially but I would have gladly done it again 100 times over. So I do not see this undefined and unlimited use of the word "suffering" as being very effective. So if that is the guide how as Idealists do we apply it? I'm not convinced that should be the only standard but for grins let's go with it. Define suffering and what we should be doing as individuals to alleviate it. And even more important how does that individual suffering translate into being important to mind at large. In other words if it doesn't impact mind at large does it matter. If mind at large doesn't hear the individual cry in anguish does it really matter? Notice the cleaver use of the analogy "If a tree falls..."

[Eugene I]

OK out of grins and giggles let's assume what we do here matters. Does it matter as 1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person or all of the above? A real life example. As an Instrument Electrical Supervisor I had a technician that was about a useless a human being I ever met and eventually I ended up firing him. I used to love to listen how he would pontificate about all of the taxes he had to pay for well fare and this guy with benefits was making about $90,000 a year in 1985 and if he ever accomplished anything it was by accident. Now my responsibilities in that position were broad and deep. So I ended up firing him for safety violations because at that time if you fired someone with a large oil company for being useless you would get eaten alive in court. So since I fired him for safety violations we won the eventual lawsuit and his violations were real. So I heaped a huge amount of grief and suffering on this guy and his family. I protected the safety of my other employees and peers and the surrounding community. I was able to hire a much, much, much more deserving and productive person. I brought a great deal of grief and pain down on me initially but I would have gladly done it again 100 times over. So I do not see this undefined and unlimited use of the word "suffering" as being very effective. So if that is the guide how as Idealists do we apply it? I'm not convinced that should be the only standard but for grins let's go with it. Define suffering and what we should be doing as individuals to alleviate it. And even more important how does that individual suffering translate into being important to mind at large. In other words if it doesn't impact mind at large does it matter. If mind at large doesn't hear the individual cry in anguish does it really matter? Notice the cleaver use of the analogy "If a tree falls..."

Psychological component of suffering occurs in our life situations mostly due to our misconceptions about ourselves and the world that also often entail in poor behaviors. In this example you did the right thing, and if the guy would not have misconceptions about himself and the world, he would not suffer so much. On the other hand, unlike you did, there is an abundance of situations where people with similar misconceptions treat other people poorly and inflict unnecessary suffering on them, I don't think I need to give examples of those. And again, would not they have those misconceptions and would they change their behavioral patterns and the way they treat people aligned with more coherent worldviews, they would not treat other people so poorly and would not do so much damage. Noone promises a paradise on Earth, but our consciousness has the power to recognize the root causes of many of our problems and unnecessary suffering and to change the way we perceive the world and treat ourselves and others. And if that can happen on the scale of the society (by the majority of people working on themselves to accomplish such changes) then it can also change the course of the development of civilization and resolve many problems on the social scale.

[AshvinP]

Ed, you just performed a miracle... getting Eugene to admit some spiritual orientations are objectively better than others! I am definitely keeping this one in my back pocket

Yes, some are better than others in practical terms, being more functional/efficient/productive/fit with respect to certain measures.
But the measures are different and valued with different priorities. For some people the priority may be only reducing suffering and increasing happiness, for others it may be development of consciousness, or it may be goals of creative activities (that may accommodate some suffering as a price to pay), and for others it may be growing in love, or improving the society etc. Since there is no universal measures and values, we can't compare all orientations on the basis of the same universal measure and select the "best" one. But overall there are certainly some "average" measure/score of goodness/fitness that would score certain orientations (like fascism, satanism etc) lower than others.

Agreed, but that still leaves us with hierarchies of relative measures for each goal.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Define suffering and what we should be doing as individuals to alleviate it. And even more important how does that suffering translate into being important to mind at large. In other words if it doesn't impact mind at large does it matter. If mind at large doesn't hear the individual cry in anguish does it really matter? Notice the cleaver use of the analogy "If a tree falls..."

The point being made here is that whether or not the individual used as an example above was fired with just and practical cause, if before that event, as well as after the event, the individual is still living under the confusion of maya, then suffering will eventually ensue regardless. And who knows, perhaps the firing was part of the catalyst that was needed to begin to grow and learn how to get beyond it. In any case, suffering here is defined as living in the confusion of maya, such that one is in some ongoing state of turmoil, angst, loathing, depression, addiction, etc, due to that confusion. I've worked with many folks who were very good at their jobs, were well paid, well fed, not lacking in creature comforts in any way, and yet were suffering profoundly, as defined above. And in some cases the losing of all of it, jobs, money, and creature comforts was the catalyst to looking deeper into the root of their suffering, since none of it was sufficient to fill the void.

As for how does it matter to M@L , if under idealism it is none other than M@L in alter-mode that wakes up from the confusion of maya, then the question becomes what greater telos might be served by it ... and as mentioned, I can't claim to know what that might be.

[Ed Konderla]

Ed, you just performed a miracle... getting Eugene to admit some spiritual orientations are objectively better than others! I am definitely keeping this one in my back pocket

Yes, some are better than others in practical terms, being more functional/efficient/productive/fit with respect to certain measures.
But the measures are different and valued with different priorities. For some people the priority may be only reducing suffering and increasing happiness, for others it may be development of consciousness, or it may be goals of creative activities (that may accommodate some suffering as a price to pay), and for others it may be growing in love, or improving the society etc. Since there is no universal measures and values, we can't compare all orientations on the basis of the same universal measure and select the "best" one. But overall there are certainly some "average" measure/score of goodness/fitness that would score certain orientations (like fascism, satanism etc) lower than others.

Agreed, but that still leaves us with hierarchies of relative measures for each goal.

Glad I could help!

[Lou Gold]

Ed, you just performed a miracle... getting Eugene to admit some spiritual orientations are objectively better than others! I am definitely keeping this one in my back pocket

Yes, some are better than others in practical terms, being more functional/efficient/productive/fit with respect to certain measures.
But the measures are different and valued with different priorities. For some people the priority may be only reducing suffering and increasing happiness, for others it may be development of consciousness, or it may be goals of creative activities (that may accommodate some suffering as a price to pay), and for others it may be growing in love, or improving the society etc. Since there is no universal measures and values, we can't compare all orientations on the basis of the same universal measure and select the "best" one. But overall there are certainly some "average" measure/score of goodness/fitness that would score certain orientations (like fascism, satanism etc) lower than others.

By this practical measure, do we agree that some form of animism might be better for sustaining earth's ecosystems. Or for sustaining the Gaian system? Is there anything like a universal human need in this?

[Eugene I]

By this practical measure, do we agree that some form of animism might be better for sustaining earth's ecosystems. Or for sustaining the Gaian system? Is there anything like a universal human need in this?

I would say yes, it enhances our sense of empathy towards the natural world (internal psycho-spiritual benefit) and can only improve the ecology of our environment (external environmental benefit).