Here is

… one of those morning thoughts that needs to be written down to allow it to evolve.

It’s  a mathematical (analytic) thought related to psychology.

First a definition …

A (is recognized as) #controlling B.   ← which defines one aspect of  “#control”.

Now we really don’t know of care what A and B are so far, that definition can be applied to any manner of thingeys.

Forget about A … let’s just examine some possible Bs … like #thought and #will .  


I observe,  and so did mark that:  (1)  It is not usual to know why #thoughts occur … to know from whence they came … to know what is #controlling them.  Now of course there is all different degrees of that … somtimes i can almost totally focus my thoughts and control them … other times they just occur from some unknown source.  Sometimes they follow from what i am sensing in the world … or even directly from others by listening to what they say and following my connections and momentum from those signs.

Now i also observe, that (2) i can say almost the exact same thing about my will. 

So that i can generalize saying  …

both #thought and #will,  happen in a spectrum of #control by a variable source.

I am not so very sure that i can add #feeling to that generalization.  

This raise some possibilities for future research …
There was another thought that came as a result of the above, but it will need to emerge again, for the moment i have forgotten it.



See also thought 7727  – GW has said many places that the job is to make the 3 independent & then combine them again under love to achieve true freedom. If one controls the other you don’t have freedom – (not a biggy for some) Something much more interesting is the stuff in what RS says happens after death.

Just in case you didn’t read the lecture of RS there are very interesting states of being inside & outside your body, time, space, a space of will , remembrance etc. – whether you folks believe it or not the description is worth the effort to read it.

null  what would be super kewl would be you bringing your #interpretation of what #RS is saying relative to this particular context into this particular context  yourself.

Yes, and other things about you that come and go are your body toning (and weight) and physical skill and agility and ability. Those are sometimes more in your control than others and come and go on their own about as randomly as thoughts and will do normally.

… or …

You can apply yourself to any of those. For instance, you can apply yourself to a particular physical ability and someday do amazing things that no one else can, such as win figure skating at the Olympics, or jump a motocross bike 50 feet straight up in the air while doing flips, or sing with an angelic voice, and so many other things. Same with both thought and will. One can let them be as they are, sort of random, or one can apply their being to either, or both, and become skilled at forming them from consciousness, and thus skilled at creating their own reality to any degree.

The one difference is that most such things, like physical skill, is limited by physics and the human body. Thought and will have no ultimate limitation in how much you can gain control of them, or how far they can take you.  

A human either controls all these things or they don’t. It’s not random. It’s applied state of being. Which is mostly in agreement with what you said, just more exactly defined.

And true, you cannot add “feeling” to this formula. Emotions are a sense. They are a “response”. Specifically, an emotion is the bodies response to a thought. – Eckhart Tolle. Emotions are not something we control directly. The only thing we can do with them directly is suppress them. If we seek to select them, it is easy however, for all we need do to select emotions is to learn to select our thoughts. Because emotions arise directly as a result of thoughts. We may not be able to select an exact emotion that way, because the pallet of emotions and their relationship to varying thought is nearly infinite, but we can select the general direction and tone emotions will come from, by selecting our thoughts.  

Yeah – all that would do is start another long pile of words & counter-meanings.  As I read, it loosens boundaries like the universe (xor spiritual world) is digesting the human life & so on. Elsewise, it seems like the ultimate acid trip. Read it & let it free your mind without having to use your rational analysis tools to invent abstractions - which tools you may not always have in the other states of being. Some perception is artistic & not logical.  – more (*) #FoundationStoneMeditationRS

well mark, like i said to start off with,  this  is “a mathematical (analytic) thought related to psychology”.

Such abstract generalizations should never be used or grasped for as themselves …
rather they just point at where to look to experience particulars. 
If you understand analytic thought  for what it actually does,
then perhaps you will get over criticizing and avoiding it when you see it done.

Reading #RS’s stores, as you also just said, can tap into a different intuition null
but this is not that ← just as you observe.   
What specifically do you mean by  …
“it loosens boundaries like the universe (xor spiritual world) is digesting the human”

Yep, abstractia personified! null – not going to feed the animals.

okay #magor …

The next time you navigate a ship on a shifting stormy expanse of ocean, and decide not to use a map, i will not expect to meet you at any given port.

I use the stars, compass, astrolabe etc.  Got a better fix than the navigator. null

exactly … you use a map.

Nope! The map already exists in the stars.  The same way you nagivated us home when we were lost in Long Beach using the stars on the LA freeway.  Anyway today most people use GPS null

… wow null … really, mark?   the stars themselves inform people where they are on the Earth !
… i did not know null

so the ancient mariners just looked at the stars and compared them to nothing else
… #shucks why it take centuries to get around the horn of Africa to reach the orient?

If you know where the North Star is & other heavenly details you can approximate a course. Need not draw a map. The model of a flat earth probably inhibited discovery until Columbus didn’t fall of the edge.

#WTFdid having a map have to do with the different states of being I described from RS? Abstractia is not the territory particularly in the realm of being.

yeah sure mark … apparently you do not know where the map is.  perhaps you really don’t remember that the map of the Earth was carefully and painfully constructed by ancient marnaries.  perhaps that map is so well known now to the US Navy that you forget that it was not always there.  Maybe it will come back to you if you read the History of the explorers.  Until then, i will not expect to meet any ship that you steer to the port of Hong Kong. 

Perhaps you should learn to navigate the ocean like I did instead of running your fucking mouth.  Which came first the stars & the heavens & the Earth or maps?

the stars.   #sowhat … we are not talking about what came first here.   we are talking about the necessary use of a map to navigate vast and unknown terraign and meet a the same place.

so nobody went or got anywhere until somebody made a map – they just stayed in their cow patches.

yep a abstract generalization it is not the territory …
but to the extent that it does map a territory, it can be used for people to have a meeting of minds.

Perhaps your “realm of being” cannot be mapped. 
Well okay, then we will never meet with each other in that domain.
But in which case, why are we even talking to each other about it?

obviously that i not what i am saying. 

what i am saying is that for people to meet at the same place on the Earth,
requires people navigate  by consulting the stars AND a map … (or moderna equivalent).

true can’t be mapped, but your conclusion is putrified by assumptions that meeting requires maps. 
Actually the Cheng Hsin Summer Newsletter handles a lot of such kinds of questions.

 Maybe, otoh, maybe I could try following the freeway to San Francisco head up the 101 & the 5 etc until I smell the stink & I would get pretty close to where you live. null
In my hippie days all I needed was a thumb & a smile. null

well there are all kinds of maps … most people do not recognize them as such.
and there are all kinds meetings … most people do not recognize them as such.

i conjecture that any #representation can be used as a map ..
and is just as useful for a meeting or minds as it accurately represents the territory for those meeting in it.

then too, me thinks, it is #TurtlesAllTheWayDown  … so i factor that into the equation.

Yep, munge away the meaning of maps all the way down . 

well i claim these edges can obtain meetings and connections  more reliably than you appear to believe.

tag #connections #maps #representations

I suppose a nice map of a piece of ass is all you need. Enjoy! 

#shucks i expected you to throw your “direct experience” into the hopper here
which does not use maps.

i expected you to divide by zero again making all numbers useless,
and unilaterally declare a victory of your ego over mine. 
no #meeting of minds even desireable.

But okay null, a piece of ass would be even better null null
unfortunately null you are not providing any.

#DirectExperience #maps #representations

look in a mirror & spread your cheeks →  that’s all you get with your map.null

#CheekSpreading in a mirror – the reward of Bozo.

This is monotonous #CheekSpreading – enjoy  your own show. I’m #DoneJustLikeObama

well that matches much of my understanding.

with some notable mismatches.   i don’t get emotions exclusively from thoughts. 

Most of our disagreements center around what a thought actually is.  Your descriptions tell me that what you call thoughts, must be something that is far more tangible and causitive, than what i call thoughts.   Rather i reserve all  causitive (controlling vibrations) to what i call #will.

#btw,   i can select emotions by selecting thoughts … and i can select thoughts by selecting emotions. 
And just like you say … the maping of emotions to thoughts is many to many.   So selecting thoughts from emotions is more a selecting of #backgroun .  But thoughts can be background to emotions and emotions can be background to thoughts.  As it flows, i can select either to #inform the other.   It is all a hairy networked maze underneath … with my conscious life #supervening on that plus that of the #world.

It’s not all that hairy if you take the time to really understand … yourself. It’s colorful, but not hairy or difficult.  

I challenge you to select a thought from an emotion. An emotion may inspire a thought, but I think you will find that you can not deliberately have an emotion without a thought, and that emotion cannot deliberately create a thought, only inspire a new one which creates a new emotion.

I personally think that our disagreements are for 2 reasons.

1) You tend to be very inexact, i.e. sloppy, in your characterization of thoughts, emotions, and will. You don’t make clear distinctions. You lump several distinctions together and also ignore some perceptions you have but don’t assign any value to.

2) You don’t like the way my story feels to you. Probably because of other experiences you have had in your life that caused you to make very specific choices about how you will allow yourself to define all of these things.

X & Y munge into Z
Q & R munge into W
conclusion X,Y,Q,R munge into a mess! Perhaps P vs NP

Just like “can’t never could do anything” …

… those who prove reality with math
         live in reality so proved.

… and those who don’t
         live elsewhere   

which diagram is really very basic
← compared to this.

well i do analysis to increase my grasp of a psychology of predicting, expectecting, controlling, sensing, informing, acting and feeling.  It’s an art and a science … almost like the psychohistory of Asimov’s Hari Seldon.  A analytic study of  all the things that i experience.   So perhaps i can talk to others about it and not be misunderstood.  Can you see any of that in the pictures above and the thoughts with with they align?  it is all about the acuity of my grasp into the psychology domain.  

Instead, isn’t your munge like a person crossing their eyes as they watch their experience  opining that noting is clear?

Incidentally why do you just inadvertantly cherish #GW’s cube work ?? …
which is the same thing but with extreme munging.