#JustDoIt

...


doing it right
doing it wrong
doing it good
doing it bad
doing it correctly
fucking it up
do what thou wilt
don’t do that

just do it.

Seth
 #JustDoIt

Comments


I agree. The doing is the juice, the experience. The question is, since all doing happens in the landscape created by a thought, how did you arrive in that landscape? Did your thoughts consciously create the landscape and circumstances in which doing is occurring? Or were your thoughts drug to the scene of the doing by the circumstances born of the doing?

Either way, your thoughts and your doing arrive in the end at the same place. But having a doing bring the thoughts is like having a horse push a cart … and having your thoughts set up the doing is like having a horse pull a cart true. It is as much more efficient for your thoughts to lead your doing as it is for a horse to pull a cart instead of pushing it.

And interestingly, most of your examples are about words, not thoughts. Words are simply lesser doings. Thoughts are quite different, in character, in experience, and in the result which can be a direct manifestation. In other words, words are an experience, like doing is an experience, whereas thoughts are a creative act upon which manifestation can coalesces into material substance when the thoughts are consistent and flow true.  

For instance, a poetry reading brings an experience to the poet, and to the audience, through words. Whereas a group grid brings a manifestation directly into the experience of the group as a participated doing.

Just do it to me means to think it, create it, and participate in it as one complete act of desire becoming manifest.

Just do it to many means to start participating, until the thinking necessary for the doing to proceed, maybe comes into alignment with the original desire (if focus is not lost along the way) and then ends up creating what is wanted, or at least something in the ballpark. Doesn’t that sound how life proceeds for many? They have a desire, start doing things, if they are lucky they stay focused and on track, and eventually end up with something close to what they wanted, after a whole lot of doing and time?

It is entirely possible to think it true, create it instantly, and do it now … all in one complete stroke. But only if one knows how to directly think into being, what that kind of thinking is like, how it feels, instead of waiting for intermediate doing to align thoughts into actions in a circular motion of two steps forward to a result, one step back to think about it, and two steps forward in a doing again … and so on.

Peter Ralston describes it as direct knowing. But he also talks about it in respect to things like a martial arts tournament, which is a doing. In fact, what he calls direct knowing is actually thinking, manifesting, and doing all in one smooth stroke. I think it would be better called “direct experience” than direct knowing … and I would also call it “Just do it”.  

Well i think we are almost on the same page here … and that feels good.  My cadence is a bit different.  

I am free to think … and i am free to do.  To me both of those are independent behaviors.   I believe this by experience and experiment. 

The experiment i do to prove to myself that i am free is to raise my my arm whenever.  I always can do that and have done it in oh so many different contexts.  I now have no doubt that, unless i become disabled, or somebody else is restraining me, that i can raise my arm whenever. 

I can also think whatever.  In words, or intentions, even without saying anything to myself verbally. 

So for me the one independent behavior does not necessarily “drag the other behavior” to the same landscape.  Not necessarily thought to action, or necessarily action to thought.  They appear to be independent animals. 

But I can connect them. 

Last night i did a little experiment to see if i could connect my thoughts to what i do in the manner in which you talk.   It was really a very simple experiment.  First i chose an action … a trivial one … one where there was not other tension associated … one that i could do or not do whevever and there would be no other negative or positive consequences whatsoever.   For that i chose raising my right index finger. 

Then i independantly chose a thought … an inconsequential thought … it could be anything … i chose a verbal though … i chose to “think A”. 

Now the question was can i make “think A” “raise my right index finger”.  

Now, of course i already knew that i could “think A” all day long and twice on Sunday and it would not “raise my right index finger” … nope, would never happen. 

But could i make “think A” “raise my right index finger” ?

Well #shucks i could.   So i “though A” -and- I “raised my right index finger”.   Then i did it again, and i did it again, and just for laughfs i did it 17 times.  

Now guess what?   If i “think A”, my “right index finger will raise”. 

If you doubt it, i will show you a video. 

I said that to say, that yes, i can connect my thoughts to what i do, so that the thoughts come first and the actions follow immediately. 

null

Good stuff on “Think A”.  

As to “To me both of those are independent behaviors.” … well, lets see you raise your right arm without a preceding thought. Go ahead, try it! …

A hypnotist can raise your right arm without a thought by you, but can you?


good question null … and strangely chosen null … i will get back with you on that … it is a matter of timing and awareness … but now i finally do my state taxes … the state of Washington thinks that i must null

Well, of course, the Sate of Washington does not think. You thought it and so the State of Washington is moving to your thought, just like your arm does. Or the way I say it … it is your story.  

depends on the way you look at it.   the state of Washington passed a law.  that was a pubic event of that group.  i claim that legislation was just like a thought.   it was to the group actions of the citizens of Washington, just as my private thoughts are to my own actions. 

And so your story goes. One can write that story differently, and I often do. You simply want to have particular interactions with others who write that story similar to yours, so you keep that story and thus it is so for you.

In fact, it is quite possible to have interactions with people who write the tax story and still have your own story … just means you need to introduce some extra creativity into your own story to resolve the differences on both sides so everyone is happy … you are possibly not comfortable with doing that, it is easier to share the same story, less story work even if it means a lot of actual bookkeeping work, and feels safer too, but it is quite possible to have any story of your own and still get along fine with people who share a particular story.

Lots of the time people are just lazy and don’t want to put the work into shared stories to make them work with differences, and also not many people realize they can, even if they are highly creative people and able to write their own compatible story. Not many schools of thought teach this stuff … or so it has been in the past.  


okay i can go with that one null

#thinking and #doing are independent … unless we intentionally (or unintentionally) connect them. 

Both are free … and we are free to connect them just as we will.

They function in different spaces or contexts or #multiverses … just according to our conceptions. 

In “Outside/Inside VS Belief/Facts” see where i believe their spaces to be. 

Sorry to say, but that is only a conjecture until you can demonstrate that you can intentionally move your right arm without a thought, however brief that thought is.

Nathan, that it is a trick question …. i see the trick … when i get a long enough moment away from my taxes i will explain it … but, who knows, by then perhaps you will have figured it out yourself.

Maybe you are tricking yourself as a way of resolving the paradox at the boundary of your designated box, but it is no tick to me … it is a simple demonstration of thought preceding doing and how that works and can be taken further to show why it is putting the horse in front of the cart … and can then be taken even further to show why you cannot do it, but a hypnotist can, and what that means about the nature of reality.

But go ahead, let’s hear your trick, when you are done living out your tax story.  

The trick is that …

an intention is a thought. 


You are asking me to do something without thinking while i think it. 

That is necessarily impossible. 

The fact is that i do things all the time without thinking.   Which is not a good idea if i am driving in speeding traffic … but none the less it happens all the time.

#hmmm … so then you are saying that thinking, and doing, are not independent? But that it is impossible to have a doing without a thinking?  If so, you are correct, what you said above to the contrary notwithstanding. null

i am saying that thinking and doing are independent. 

But that they can be connected to be dependent … just as people make those connections.

I never said that it is impossible to have a doing without a thinking.  In fact it happens all the time. 

I said nothing that contradicted what i actually said. 

Where is this doing that does not come from a thought? You may be tempted to say that instinct is such, but realize before you go down that path that science has proven with MRI technology that neurons do fire in a thought-pattern during instinctive actions … and even before that, people have described “time slowing down” for them in instinctive situations where they became aware of the very brief thoughts that happen during an instinctive reaction … and I myself noticed that smoking weed makes those thoughts observable consciously too. Even if a thought is very brief, it is still a thought.

So where else might you find this doing that had no thought?

… well Huston, we have a scoping problem.   I’ll get back to you on that when i make more progress on my taxes.   In the meanwhile consider water falling from the sky as rain.  Where is the thought?

Actually it is quite possible to identify thoughts out in that scope … but I think it is safe to say that your “Just do it” was already scoping doing to that which humans do, and probably even that which humans do intentionally … though it won’t make a difference in the end if you say intentionally or not.

In any case, even if you want to wiggle out of the idea that you were talking about what humans do … lets keep it in that scope for now and when you see thought → doing in that scope, then we can look at what goes on in larger scopes, okay? There is plenty to be groked right here in human doing yet.  

interesting indeed null … but i am not going to think about it now … you know … the governor  got his hand in my panties null.