View Full Version : SB_UK, What is completion of mind?


mildadhd
11-05-14, 08:29 PM
SB_UK,

What is completion of Mind?





P

SB_UK
11-06-14, 05:45 AM
Thanks for the question.

It's the only really important point that we need to understand.



Human beings are characterized with a new property as of speciation event ~ 40,000 years ago
We have a mind which allows us to build a model of understanding of the world around us
But it also carries a major weakness because it permits us to realise that we're finite organisms who're dying from the moment we're born and are not happy - for many reasons including the knowledge that we're dying from the moment we're born
So - there's an essential unhappiness which people try to hide their eyes from by chasing the primitive model of happiness which reflects materialism - but it's not useful and is an addictive (addiction is always bad) path because happiness is fleeting and more happiness requires more material wealth, power etc ie we're looking at a CLASSICAL addiction.
This addictive model of happiness is to be seen in the animal kingdom ie dominant males (kings) fighting to be in charge with females fighting to be alongside the dominant male - note relationship between very rich old men and young model 'gold diggers' ... ... ie it's a primitive reward system which people can be attracted to, in order to feel happiness ... ... but it's addictive happiness and is not a model which we should be striving towards in much the same way that heroin addiction is not advocated by anybody sensible.
So - if it's not materialism - then perhaps there's something related to mind which can unlock the key to non-addictive happiness.
The problem though is - is that we need to know what to put into mind - since all too easily the pursuit of selfish knowledge can become, in exactly the same way as the pursuit of materialism - addictively appealing.
So - what is it that we need to put into mind ?
To which the response is as much information, knowledge, understanding which allows the individual to tell right from wrong.
The process of completion of mind is the adoption of wisdom - is a process of generation of a mind which is internally logically consistent yes with species wellbeing ... ... but the utility spreads out from species wellbeing and incorporates thereafter understanding of reality (our context within reality) and thereafter how to improve our enjoyment within reality (which will include how to ensure a high quality existence to all people incorporating things like how to build instruments, bikes, software etc) ... ...
So the process of completion of mind is simply the generation of an enforcedly moral mind ie a basic structure of mind which has the best interests of the species in mind through a process of education which the individual has engaged in which allows him/her to tell right from wrong.
Thereafter (with a foundation of morality) - the individual then has the foundations to perhaps do science .. perhaps tech ... perhaps art ... ... ie to do the things we do - but importantly what differs post-enlightenment vs pre-enlightenmenty - is that the motivation at 'enforced moral consistency/enlightenment/wisdom' is to make the world a better place ie NO CHARGE MADE because reward = personal reward and no external reward (= addictive reward) is required - moreso because that affliction (towards materialism) is a placeholder ie is usurped/transcended at completion of mind and exchange of reward systems.
Upon exchange of reward systems ie at loss of materialistic urge and replacement with happiness through moral (mere) existence ... ... we've in effect cheated the mind (and it's knowledge that we're about to die) - no longer care - are alive.
The slight irony is that (and this is unprovable) - but religion wants us to see that achieving enlightenment places us in a conformation in which our underlying spirit is in resonance with God ... ... and upon our bodily death returns to God ie the phrase 'when we die we go to heaven' ... ... just to be imagined as our udnerlying spirit melding back into a frame of reality which existed at the precise point before the Big Bang ie an orthogonal reality which projects our dualistic reality.



So - the simplest expression of 'what is completion of mind' would be the process of achieving enlightenment/resurrection through the individual actively pursuing an udnerstanding of what is right and what is wrong.
As the individual grows to characterize right/wrong = the individual's behaviour will naturally tend towards moral.
At some point a threshold is reached and the individual becomes enforcedly moral (the transition/enlightnement/resurrection) and is free to live their lives without the fears which arise through mind.


So - we've a different model for education here - which places self-directed enquiry into morality as key.
And we've the observation of a transition from reward system materialism to reward system existence with the development of mind / action which is in line with rational morality.


The key point to make is that it's rational morality ie I could believe that forcing cream cakes into the obese is moral ... ... an idea which is dispelled through basic scientific understanding.


To be moral requires a level of sense/rationality and so as such requires a mind which attempts and with some vigour to identify potentially incorrect models of understanding ie ideas which're silly - and to replace them with ideas which're better.

SB_UK
11-06-14, 06:50 AM
The fairly neat corollary to all of the above is that it's terribly easy to tell somebody who's on their way/has arrived
- simply by their externally obvious affinity to materialism.

Anybody who displays wealth is by their own clear admission far from losing the materialistic urge - places them as far from being properly human actually even further than the newborn mind.

The point being that feeding addiction takes us backwards -

'do not feed the animal' is the sign which should hang over the materialistic reward system.

-*-

But I just like nice things and am moral doesn't cut it -
you just CANNOT feel the attraction to selfish ownership of money, property, knowledge with increasing morality/enforced morality

- it's the desire which is usurped at enlightenment -

- so there's no way of keeping the desire partially alight when it has been overcome.

Just classic denial behaviour - no I'm not addicted to my own CV, to my portfolio of properties - I'm actually a decent individual -
- you can't do both - either you're motivated to materialism and can do it or you're not and you can't.

SB_UK
11-06-14, 06:54 AM
What are the signs of the materialistic reward system ?

Love money.
Love property.
Love personal standing - try to make it as high as possible in some hierarchy, in the hierarchy.
Love of people who are high in hierarchy (toadying behaviour).
Love of competition ie beating people even if by cheating, epecially by cheating.
Supporting 1 team over another ie caring whether one team be it football, religious, school of thought wins ... ... that's a variation on the competitive (between human beings) primitive desire exposing itself
Liking to hear oneself talk.
No capacity to eliminate doublethink.
Little cognitive dissonance.
Not being able to understand other people.
Not being able to communicate in any way which doesn't lift the individual's ego.
Living for CV which is the modern day equivalent of ego.
Loving charity (to appease the conscience) ie something to add to CV.
Grasping nature.
Absence in empathy as defined by the incapacity to engage in activism towards overthrowing hierarchy.
Teach by refusing questions ie lecture at not answer doubts - indiivdual can't answer questions as has adopted a model of understanding which is foisted ie bulk learnt without questioning.
Shelters behing authority ie I've all this knowledge - you haven't ... I'm right.
Attracted to lifestyles which echo importance ie fancy cars, fancy houses - like to impress - use materialism (fancy things) and knowledge (fancy certificates) to impress.
Like to pretend that they're moral - see charity point above - to create the illusion as they sit atop piles of money that they're doing something for species wellbeing - complete rubbish - they just want your money and know that if you're trusted it's easier to blindside you and lift it.

SB_UK
11-06-14, 07:01 AM
It's fairly obvious that the extreme of the behaviour above is to be found in the arrogant lawyer/politician - often related to British monarchy ... ... that's where we see the closest connection between all of the character traits above.

Also - have to look a certain way - think the suit and perfect hair of a politician.
Also - 'eye candy' for wife - think Sarkozy, Hollande and Berlusconi - use of 'image' (marketing) to fool people into support.
Love to promise that they'll give you things ... ... to get you on your side - bribery - the basic tool of a politician is to cut taxes to win votes.

It's all standard stuff.

Simply sophist (does things for money) vs Socrates
- the only way for the sophist to get better is for the sophist to develop a moral mind -which was Socrates' tool ie to reflect without stating personal stance - his view -
the individual then re-sculpts his/her own mind towards morality alone.

-*-

The basic point I'm getting at - is that knowing what is right and what is wrong is the ONLY requirement from education.
Western educations don't do this - they teach you how to be good at doing what is wrong (ie earning more money than everybody else) and so it's the standard education because of its misguided nature which prevents society from achieving enlightenent - because all that's popping off the conveyor belts are people who're addicted and are due to develop an ever greater addiction through feeding the addiction by life experience.

What's the single most important thing which keeps the primitive reward system in place.

wELL you've addicted the population so fear of losing job ie fear of access to heroin is what keeps people as 'good' docile immoral citizens.

Cyanide
11-06-14, 07:17 AM
I don't know how I stumbled upon this but I'm glad I did. Thanks SB_UK for the interesting read and perspective.

If you would be so kind to elaborate on a couple of points, could you please answer the following?

Where did the term "completion of mind" come from? Is this a term you've coined? I'm familiar with (and fond of) mindfulness but this seems a little different.

What are the signs of the materialistic reward system ?

...
...
Little cognitive dissonance.
...
Grasping nature.
..

I completely understand and wholeheartedly agree with the other points but don't quite understand what you mean with these. To my understanding cognitive dissonance is a bad thing and should be weeded out or acknowledged at the very least?

Also maybe I'm missing something but as part of the natural universe ourselves it seems that understanding nature is fundamental to reality-based progress? Or do you mean similarly to the charity thing, like "flaunting an appreciation for nature"?

Also for bonus points: would you identify as a determinist at all? If not, why?

Thanks again!

SB_UK
11-06-14, 07:44 AM
IE

Western educational system leads to addiction.
Workplace feeds addiction.

And what we're meant to do is to escape the addiction by learning what is wrong/right - changing reward systems - losing addictive propensity.

We shift from the reward system (materialism) -> reward system (existence)

and it's all simply to do with building a rational, moral, holistic model of what is right and what is wrong.

-*-

What is right ?

Creating a series of local co-operatives which deliver proper food and shelter sustainably to all people - and then for people to (without any fear of survival) -
[ remember that evolution selects for qualities (mind) which're supposed to favour survival ]
- to be the best that one would like to be.

SB_UK
11-06-14, 08:07 AM
I don't know how I stumbled upon this but I'm glad I did. Thanks SB_UK for the interesting read and perspective.

If you would be so kind to elaborate on a couple of points, could you please answer the following?

Where did the term "completion of mind" come from? Is this a term you've coined? I'm familiar with (and fond of) mindfulness but this seems a little different.

I think it may be the same as the term enlightenment - but I think completion of mind is a little better as it gives us the impression that there's a start and an end to mind. Also - ther term Vedanta means - 'end of knowledge' - and so is equivalent. I'm trying to find the simplest of words to describe something that I think has been described over and over again by people in the past - but has caused confusion through choice of words used.
End of knowledge ? Enlightenment ? are more abstract than 'completion of mind' I think.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK http://www.addforums.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1695302#post1695302)
What are the signs of the materialistic reward system ?

...
...
Little cognitive dissonance.
...
Grasping nature.
..

I completely understand and wholeheartedly agree with the other points but don't quite understand what you mean with these. To my understanding cognitive dissonance is a bad thing and should be weeded out or acknowledged at the very least?
Exactly but it's important to feel cognitive dissonance as a precursor to weeding out knowledge which causes it ... ... adn so not feeling cognitive dissonance 'll mean that the individual doesn't have the toolbox to identify and eliminate it - with it being illogical understanding held in mind - expressing itself through immoral/illogical behaviour ie we are (our external behaviour) directed by our minds - and so field (externally) the illogic held internally withion our own understanding (mind).Also maybe I'm missing something but as part of the natural universe ourselves it seems that understanding nature is fundamental to reality-based progress? Or do you mean similarly to the charity thing, like "flaunting an appreciation for nature"?
Exactly understanding nature is essential but pretending to udnerstand nature for personal gain is the pitfall ie egnerating understadning which is superfluous ie confuses rather than helps people towards understanding context.Also for bonus points: would you identify as a determinist at all? If not, why?

Good point - I'm suggesting that if 13.8 billion years ago in some other area of space - there had been a big bang event - human beings'd still be here (give or take) rationalising mind (having the same discussions we're having) - so deterministic but with the important proviso that it's deterministic not from any perspective we hold - because we're the constructs of nature which're ourselves undergoing a deterministic progression.
So - simple example - could we ever get a monkey to understand how great the musical chills from listening to string instruments could be - no - too difficult - we're undergoing a deterministic progression - but because it's us ourselves undergoing it - a couple of stages of evolution away from us is difficult for us, in much the same way that monkeys don't enjoy music - to entertain. Thanks again!Tried to respond as quickly as a I could - without correcting anything written.
Popped into quotes above.

SB_UK
11-06-14, 08:11 AM
The problem with describing the deterministic stance is that it somehow feels dull to embrace determinism.

I try to paraphrase determinism as a solid guarantee (from evolution) that things will become exponentially/unimaginably better with time (subsequent evolutionary events)

- not so people will swallow the idea - but because evolution's tendency towards increasing informational entropy has to be aligned with human reward or - 'his will NOT be done' ie the best way of generating an informationally dense and ever more informationally dense Universe is to make US want it.

SB_UK
11-06-14, 08:13 AM
Oh I see... ... 'grasping nature' means an individual who has a personal grasping rapacious character
- not somebody who is attempt to understand (grasp) nature.