I vent ideas here. Please forgive me for my inability to write or any misspellings.
No matter how smart, Intelligence is limited to culture.
In this society we can be only enemies. Where everyone is divided, there is no equal. The culture divides us so that we may never be equals or see each other as one; thus, never being fully capable of communicating without some sort of resentment getting in the way. There is always a leader and a follower. A great one that everyone follows and followers that will never be great. That should not be; instead, none should be so highly regarded so that all voices can be heard.
If the price is progress then what is the use if we are progressing in the direction where only a few get to live. The goal is life, not individual stardom toward power.
Enlightenment can also be discovered when the conflict between yourself ends. Just as you embrace your good nature and intelligence also too should you embrace your bad nature and ignorance. No side of self should be shun from your thoughts or expression.
A balance should be struck to stop the unstable personality that confides in guilt and suppression rather than expression. You are neither good nor evil nor smart or dumb; as a wise man once said “you are all of these and none of these.”
In the future when we have read all the books and taught all the theory’s on whatever subject we seek, we will find that there is a void left by our lazy mind that came about by being told what to think all those years.
Cultivate the mind by exercise of thought. Don’t worry about rather someone else already thought of it, but rather, continue forward into your unknown.
A New Idea.
A new idea is devised by the compound efforts of radical thinking. The notion of getting it right the first time is certainly there; yet for most, the new idea cannot be seen very well with historical facts plaguing the way of new thought. In order to see past the old facts we must chip away at the foundation of facts, until the “truth” or “law” is dissolved.
Once free from the old ways we must still compound our ideas until a truly new idea is formed. Even still the new idea can be compromised with the historical since of what other academic fields you use as a basis or example for you to work off of. The idea cannot be so alien that you cannot translate it to anyone, but it must be foreign enough to create a new path for your work to be based off.
Morality is in the state of inspiration. Morality cannot be taught, only inspired rather positive or negatively.
Consciousness and the body can be equated to that of a waterfall. Does it matter how minuscule the change is or how much can occur? Why is a teeny tiny change to the self any different than that of a big one?
If you take a waterfall for all its wonder and beauty it has, at what point is the waterfall not the same as before? Was it ever the same, or did it ever have a substantial existence? If I were to say move a rock, would it be the same? If it was to lose some of its shape, is it considered the same as before? And if I was to stop the flow of the water, would that end the existence of the waterfall?
If we are talking molecule for molecule of what the waterfall was, well then the waterfall was never really existent, for the water was never really in place. If by visual terms you say the waterfall exist, well then that was based of the rock and land underneath, but even then it was constantly eroding, changing, moving. The fragileness of the waterfall is the fragileness of our consciousness and body, to which visually existent, but substantially nature.