Thoughted

I am just now wondering how much choice we have in any given situation. We like to feel we have a multitude of choice and control over the actions in our life. Although whether or not this is the case, in my mind, is unsubstantiated.

There are extraneous factors such as mental health, stress, effects of drug and alcohol etc. Then there are also moral and ethical questions such as what makes up our moral fibre? What family of origin contexts do we come from and learn within? If we are making decisions subconsciously based on information we have adopted from other people, how much control over the decision do we really have?

True, we could come to learn every reason we make every decision throughout our days, but despite the fact that it would take a lifetime to reach that place, even then what exactly would we base our ‘choices’ on?

This is not an argument in favour of fate, I am not suggesting in this article that we have a predetermined destiny. For an article with more on that you could go here. What I am saying is that we make our choices with so much past history already cemented in our minds and so many external factors at play that we, ourselves, really don’t have too much actual interaction with the choice. Unless your argument is that our identity is made up of that same information and therefore our decision are our own, which is in effect a product of the information, context that we have come from. But what then about the external influences, mental health concerns and/or effects of alcohol/drugs? These all effect our decision making and choices. Does the existence of these factors really have that much of a influence on our decisions??? Answers?

As I think more and more about time and living at the moment, I can imagine many different interpretations of being present.

To most people, being present it about being in any place at any one time. To others, it is more about being at the place but listening and feeling and sensing all the information which surrounds you. Then there is a further interpretation pertaining to the self and conscious. This is perhaps the hardest interpretation to conceptualise.

Eastern philosophy explores the idea that living can either be had in the field of the past, drawing upon memories, artefacts, conversations, pictures, text etc. In my opinion, this is quite pointless as the past has already existed and as far as we know, is no longer available to live in (aside from in the realm of our own imagination/memory). So why do we continue to access these memories? For some it brings us happiness and maybe validates who we are. We recognise our past success and feel that we are worthy and that we are capable humans. Alternatively they remind us of our failures and as a result we aim not to revisit those negative experiences. So the memory prevents us from interacting in some style of activity. As I think of it now, I feel that we should aim to know our self well enough to know what we are capable of without living in the past and also have no need of accessing those memories because we love who we are regardless of our failures. There should be no shame in attempting something and failing in it. The beauty is in the fight. How many times have you tried to do something you failed in previously, only to succeed unexpectedly? I have a few times.

There is also the field of the future, opening hopes and aspirations, plans and templates for things to come. While I recognise the therapeutic benefit of planning and having something to hold on to or hope for, I also recognise that living for the future is allowing yourself to be vulnerable to the endless list of possibilities. It also creates a uncontrollable sense of anxiety – will the hope turn into reality? Will the plan work as thought out, or will life throw in some unexpected turn, changing the course of your well thought out arrangement? If we truly know our self and aim to be happy at every moment, despite what we are confronted with, then we don’t really need to live in the future. TO live in the future or past is to ignore the experiences we are being given at present, and this leads me to the final field of living.

Living in the present is about accepting and recognising. Recognise all the emotions that humans are capable of experiencing along the spectrum and the effects they have on the body and spirit. Accepting all the random things that happen to us and not giving in to the emotions that they bare. In reality, failure is but a figment of our own conscious – we deem our own failure and/or success. A failure to you may not necessarily be a failure to me. This is what separates the optimist and the pessimist/realist.

Having said all of this, I do not claim to be some guru levitating at the base of a hill wearing nothing but my happy thoughts (cringe-worthy as it may be for some), I do think thinking along this path is heading in the right direction. Maybe continual thought and maybe learning about ones self are the tools that could bring the ultimate presence closer and closer to being. Meditation is the (slow) process of learning about the self through mindfulness and the link between the mental state and the physiological state. I have heard many stories of people curing their own illness or over coming near paralysis. Could this be an indication of mind over matter? You be the judge…

Im also interested to know which field of living you feel you exist most in? Why?

Recently I have been pondering whether or not the endeavours I am hungry to journey upon and the achievements I am ambitious to attain, are really what I am meant to do or what will make me happy.

I am of Persian decent and our culture and religion is heavily embedded in introspection and self exploration. Meditation is one vehicle to investigate the self, as practiced by many a wise man before me. Some meditation styles suggest that humans store negative energy in our bodies and need to release that energy through meditation. Only then can we achieve true happiness.

Western discourse prescribes a different course of action to arrive at the outcome of happiness. Traditionally speaking, a modernity paradigm is transfixed on consumerism and ease of function. Contemporary western culture also relies on a ‘medicalised’ and ‘expert theory’, often relying on specialists, clinicians and other people to tell you what’s wrong with you. The latest in medical research on personal happiness focuses on neuro-plasticity or neuro pathways which are like beaten tracks in your brain due to over thinking in the same way. For example, the positive person stays positive because their brain is programmed to think in such a way – while their environment interplays in these thought processes, the brain will instinctively return to a ‘rosie coloured’ thought.

I am interested in the disparity between ancient and modern philosophies on the topic as well as the eastern and western remedies for unhappiness. While I can see that modern practices are going through the process of change incorporating eastern practices such as yoga and meditation, in contemporary daily western culture and life. My local fitness first offers a range of these classes and they are all facilitated by a fit young Australian as opposed to a decaying Indian with a history of mountainous cave self exploration. It is unrealistic to expect to be able to live a life free of material yearning while living in a metropolitan city. Personally, I feel it is also as unrealistic to expect to be able to live in such a metropolitan without some level of self knowledge and emotional intelligence. Maybe the solution is an amalgamation of both the old and new or east and west? The next question is how do we balance the two on with consideration to work/ leisure life…

I was just talking with my best friend around all the concepts that we create and abide by. I found it interesting to hear his thoughts on the subject and it got me thinking a little about all of societies implications. Read the rest of this entry »

Ever since I was a kid I have pertained to the theory that everything in a persons life reaches a balance as long as that person has a clear and rational perspective on life. If you have one bad thing on a scale of 1 to 10, then you will have an equally positive thing to balance the scale out. The trick is seeing the positives and negatives.

Read the rest of this entry »

Or are they one in the same? After countless hours contemplating peoples actions and the trends I witness growing up in a capitalist environment, I cannot find a definitive answer or universal truth. Rationally speaking, it should be accurate to say people are aiming for happiness by gaining status and money, however while looking at the evidence I come to a different conclusion.

Read the rest of this entry »

If a person is virtually a vegetable and can have no impact to society or any ones life, should they continue living? That is to say should their family continue allowing them to live and use the resources of the world. Is hanging onto their existence simply being afraid of death? Of losing a loved one? Read the rest of this entry »

Today I was having a talk with my good friend and co-writer of this site about my future. He brought up a subject which I have recently had deep thought about (as I do with many subjects unfortunately), and that was about making investments. Investment, which to me, is the simple the act of investing. The problem is there is a misconception of what that actually entails.

Read the rest of this entry »

The story of The Cave is an ancient analogy of the world, which if anything has only become more true.

For those who have not yet read the cave, it describes the story of a group of prisoners stuck in a cave, chained together in front of a large wall. The wall displays shadow images which are of real creatures walking on a bridge Read the rest of this entry »

After writing the last article on religion, I began thinking about why it is religion is so often left out of philosophical thinking. Why is it so many people who love philosophy dont include religious teachings? I concluded that people are drawing major differences in the ways that religion presents information compared to the philosophical method. Read the rest of this entry »