Chance, I agree with our common interest in finding a common language. I’m not sure any of the following applies to your point, but I’ll say it anyway:

I don’t think “finding a common language” means totally excluding all other language systems, but rather connecting the dots between them. If we use another language system in this feed, it should be promptly translated, allowing us to see why others benefit from seemingly absurd beliefs. That’s why I connected these:

A) how by observing my thoughts and feelings, I notice that my thoughts suck (the feeling of) energy from voluntary muscles (or don’t facilitate motivation).

B) behavioral investment shutdown

As true as my thoughts seemed intellectually, my body wasn’t interested.

 What use would the unified theory be if we insisted on excluding all other language systems, when, if we’re on the track of something universal, the unified theory should be mapped onto whatever is true and universal in other language games.

Most atheists with more worldly experience, I would bet, know of a moment when the language of religion suddenly fits the context of their lives better than sterile  modernism, and for the sake of getting through a particular struggle, go along with it, and would probably admit that it “felt right”.

If we simply excluded the words of any other language system, like some subculture cutting itself off from the world, we’d lose.

The only way I see any of this working is how everything else works these days: by connecting the dots in ways not yet seen.

“True genius is revealing the obvious, taken-for-granted in a new light” - someone said something like that.

One day, I confidently predict the words of every religion will be mapped onto a more completed project that remains farther down the path we’ve begun, and it remains to be seen if our work here will be the seed of that, or if some other project will get there. And that a big reason I’m so excited to be a part of this (and also just to free myself).

Jamie






On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 7:51 PM Chance McDermott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Jamie,

These are fascinating points.  I do believe at this time that people are stronger when they have internal coherence, and weaker when energy has to route itself indirectly. 

As for the specifics, we really do need to speak in Unified Theory/ToK language to track where how and why physical strength relates to emotional coherence.  

-Chance

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 8:48 PM Jamie D <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Some people in Kinesiology claim you can measure the "truth" of a statement by measuring the strength of your muscles when hearing it. No surprise there's a lot of controversy about this. This is a discussion about what manner of "true" might be the case. 

I'm interested in finding out which permutation develops energy as not just a solution to depression, but perhaps achieving higher levels of "vibration" or inner freedom than recognized as normal.

I was meditating in Self-Enquiry recently, observing how various thoughts trigger various changes in the flow of energy within my body, and noticing how much of my thinking "sucks" or "denies" energy from my voluntary muscles (I wonder if that's how the term "suck" came to be). One can see how this connects to behavioral shutdown, depression, and low self-esteem.

Clearly the body will support some thoughts and actions and not others, and I believe this has everything to do with the most interesting stories and examples of human nature: 
*how revenge is a bad idea, 
*why some say those who believe the most will always win, 
*how finding God and repentance provides new life, 
*how talking to God or your self/subconscious/body in prayer causes subtle feelings of change that could emerge later into radically different behaviors.

I'm reminded to really check my intentions. I currently think that the energy behind a simple intention, say to win a game of poker, can be refracted into many other intentions based on how the poker game is played, and very little is premeditated. A person can set out to play the game, hoping to win, but in a manner that necessarily translates into other intentions and emotions like anger, humiliation, etc.

Joe Rogan talked about how terrible it is to lose a big fight. Why MUST that be the case? Is it not possible to invest just as much energy into winning, without caring if you lose, in order to live wisely? 

And if I try to live that way, peers will often presume and impose such frames upon you, requiring some will of mind to resist the "curses".

Another question is: can the body be wrong? Can emotions be wrong?  Can trauma cause someone to feel shame for having thoughts that go against abusers, or later, against genuine lies, that another might feel elated and victorious as solutions to their problems? The former type of person should be enraged at their peers for allowing them to be so duped! How is that made right?

Life imposes all sorts of conflicts where people have to decide if they are more deserving than another, and I don't think the answer is to put others before yourself every time with anyone. But is it to love yourself before all else?
Napolean once said, "I love nobody" and seems not to have been depressed much at all. 

Anyway, the body/subconscious clearly decide what you actually believe, and while you can negotiate with them, they may require a certain logical coherence - maybe a kind of logic yet to be written.

I'd like to see the experiments on epistemic kinesiology (if that's even been coined). it fits with behavioral investment theory BIT, and the concept of body budget, and withdrawal. 

I look forward to connecting the dots further. 


--
-Jamie 
############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

--
-Jamie 
############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1