Replying to LO27467 --
Dear Organlearners,
Gavin Ritz <garritz@xtra.co.nz> writes:
>There are some very key issues that hardly ever
>(probably never) get discussed on this LO.
Greetings dear Gavin,
Is love not patient? Does love not help intelligence to expand by
understanding how more complex things are constructed from less complex
things? Are there not key issues which are very complex? Should the less
complex things they consists of not be constructed from lesser complex
things self? How long does this process take?
>We see these very issues before us now with the
>values of Islam and how they constrain and bind
>their followers (unknown to them, at present this
>is the largest collective transference and displacement
>human problem on earth).
Islam is complex like all the other major international religions. In each
of them there are many branches, each with its own set of values. Some
branches have values which constrain their adherents more while other
branches have values which constrain them less. To deal with Islam with
more than 1 billion of followers as one gigantic and yet homogenous
religion is extremely dangerous.
>Unfortunately this is not only a problem of Islam
>but with all of us (entire human race) to a greater
>or lesser degree. Only those more constrained,
>respond more violently and seek to be heard,
>recognized and liberated.
I am glad that you stress that is goes far beyond a particular religion
and even beyond all religions. It is not religions which constrain because
even irreligious humans who become more constrained react more strongly in
the same manner.
Here in South Africa when the writing against the wall became clear (about
1965) that something in apartheid was definitely wrong, people at rallies
of all political parties behaved in exactly the same manner. I remember
that somewhere in the early seventies I became deeply disturbed that even
political or cultural leaders showed the same behaviour. The more
constrained their political or cultural viewpoints were, the more violent
they became in whatever they wanted to do.
Try as I did, I could not understand what in religion, poltics and culture
made people behave in this manner. But since 1985 when I discovered the
7Es (seven essentialities of creativity) it all began to make sense to me.
People seek a scapegoat for such behaviour.
If people have such behaviour in religion, then their religion is the
culprit. If people do it in politics, then their politics is the culprit.
If people do it in culture, then their culture is the culprit. If people
do it in economy, then their economy is the culprit. If people do it in
education, then their education is the culprit. So I can go on and on and
on.......
Before 1985 I would encounter a few people who would say that the
wholeness in people behaving in such a manner has been fragmented. I was
beginning to see the same thing on some occasions, but often not. So I
began to wonder whether wholeness is not also a red herring.
However after 1985 I began to see the full picture. This insight did not
came immediately, but took some 5 years to develop. Anyone of the 7Es
(liveness, sureness, wholeness, fruitfulness, spareness, otherness and
openness) could be seriously impaired. Often many of them were seriously
impaired.
At first I could not understand this impairing of many 7Es and sometimes
even all seven of them. But then I began to understand how deeply these
7Es depend on each other for its own growth. For example, sureness may
first become deeply impaired . As a result of this some of the other 7Es
will also become impaired. I began to learn how important it is to find
that first one when helping people to become healthy in their spirituality
once again. It makes the healing far more rapid.
>Unfortunately most of those trying to liberate
>themselves haven't the FAINTEST idea what
>they are LIBERATING. Normally it is seen from
>something or someone. This is the saddest of all
>because generally it is from their own imposed
>bondage's and from others binding them with
>their reflected values imposed by themselves.
I think they have a vivid idea what they want to liberate. But the problem
is that this idea is acting as a scapegoat. This scapegoat they have
indentified themselves. However, they seldom imposed the bondage on
themselves. This bondage come from a severe impairing in at least one of
the 7Es. This impairing was caused by violent experiences. These violent
experiences were caused by other of whom some of the 7Es are also severely
impaired.
>....(generally feudal and autocratic systems. However
>because of transference this system comes about
>because of the very values that are projected by
>the people themselves). If you listen carefully to
>the Arab TV from the UK these issues are so clear
>it is scary.
On one point I agree strongly with you -- transference. But in the rest I
differ. I do not think it is the transference of any system. It is the
tranference of sheer violence itself. Country A transfer it to country B
and then B transfer it back to A only for A to transfer it back ......
Obviously, people make systems out of violence and call them terrorism,
war, covert operations, sanctions and boycotts.
No, no, it is not only the Arabs on TV. I am not going to teach any fellow
learner how to do it. But take Google's advance search engine and focus on
any country like Australia, USA, Spain, Austria, Japan and with using the
right key words you will find hair raising stuff.
(snip)
>Accountability
>Motives.
>
>Of the last one I have said so much but
>unfortunately very few on this LO chat room
>have vaguely picked up on this. This is due to
>denial because of the mental pain it invokes.
Please consider my questions right at te beginning once again. People do
not deny speaking about motives. Motives are very complex and people find
it extremely difficult to articulate themselves on any complex topic.
>The issue of transference is so great that almost
>99.9% of the population are totally unaware that
>it even exists. And those that do know it exists,
>battle on a daily basis to accept that it is so because
>of denial, blame, fear (motives) and rationalization.
>Until we all accept transference, have tools to
>recognize it we will never get past even the first
>hurdle to understand love.
Violence is one thing which can be transfered to and fro. But love is
another thing which can also be transfered to and fro. The understanding
love increases with every transference of love.
>Point: Love will never expand intelligence in any
>meaningful way unless we understand, recognize
>the mechanism of transference when and where it
>happens to us personally and collectively.
I think otherwise. Love, growing by transference of love, does expand
intelligence. Have you not written self
>with projected kindest and a love transference
>gavin
Thank you Gavin for pointing out how important the concept of transference
is. It is nested in the "becoming" of the essentiality liveness
("becoming-being"). Transference is a becoming. Violence is a
becoming-being. Love is a becoming-being. The choice which one we will
transfer is up to us. May we choose wisely.
With care and best wishes
--At de Lange <amdelange@gold.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.