Power and Human Interaction

Introducing people of all ages to mythology... in pre-college educational curricula, youth orgs, the media, etc. Share your knowledge, stories, unit and lesson plans, techniques, and more.

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

captsunshine wrote:There are no absolutes in yardstick that you use to qualify any action.
Rights and Wrongs, are mind constructs, that arise from the delusion, that makes you believe in absolute nature of this world.
The system will correct itself...
Trouble is we all want it to happen in our wee lifetime.
If you want to intervene, do so at the risk of creating more imbalance into a state that is already in a flux.
Breathe.

Hello Captainsunshine; good to see you about the boards again.

The point you raise is one I think that presents a conundrum for many of us; and that is about making the distinctions between when to engage; or as Joseph Campbell might phrase it: " To participate "; and when to step back and ( let nature take it's course ) so to speak. To me the story of his interaction with the spiritual master where he asked: " If all is Brahman how do we say no? " to the harsh realities of life; to which the Teacher replies: " For you and me; we say yes "; ( frames this condition of living in reality that we all face ). But saying " yea to life as it is " ( also ) means " participation " in the world for Campbell also states: " If you see a serpent about to bite somebody you kill it ".

But I think the idea of " Wu Wei "; or concept of ( action - non-action ) may apply here as well. The difficulty I think that we all face as human beings is in looking at life as it is evolving and thinking there that is a " formula "; when " reality " itself is constantly changing. And the finding of that still point of balance within one's self is in itself part of the process of our individual journeys. Both Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell I think have added much of this understanding of the " harmonizing of the individual " in western thought by pointing towards these internal landscapes that some of the great mythologies in the east have dealt with for a long time.

But concerning this particular issue IMHO Joseph Campbell's statement that: " Life is not a problem to be solved; but a mystery to be lived "; might be a better " lense " with which to view instead of a psychological position with which to assume. The reason being that a formula of inaction concerning a " snake " might be better served perhaps by a ( reaction ) of " community awareness ".

But just to be clear; ( No ); I don't necessarily claim any answers here. I struggle with the ambivalence about these issues and dilemmas like most of the folks I know. But the point you make here is an excellent one.

( Incidentally; I find it both curious and ironic in a way that this issue arrives in this post upon the release tomorrow of the second installment of J.R. Tolkien's - " The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug "; for humanity's conflict's is one of the major themes that is woven throughout much his work; ( including the " The Ring " trilogy ).


Cheers :)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

CarmelaBear
Associate
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: The Land of Enchantment

Post by CarmelaBear »

JamesN. wrote:I saw this news article this morning and it represents to me one of the absolute worst examples of tyranny and abuses of power I can think of. :evil:

http://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-publi ... 55520.html

I sure hope there is an outcry from the " Global Community " against this for to let it go unanswered would be unconscionable and an invitation for more of this sinister, barbaric, and brutal behavior. :!:
In Illinois alone, 360 people were executed before the death penalty was abolished two years ago. It is estimated that around 75 of that number may have been completely innocent. Some were killed for rape and witch craft.

From Wikipedia:
The Espy file, compiled by M. Watt Espy and John Ortiz Smykla, lists 15,269 people executed in the United States and its predecessor colonies between 1608 and 1991. From 1930 to 2002, 4,661 executions were carried out in the U.S, about two-thirds of them in the first 20 years. Additionally, the United States Army executed 135 soldiers between 1916 and 2012.

The largest single execution in United States history was the hanging of 38 Dakota people convicted of murder and rape during the brutal Dakota War of 1862. They were executed simultaneously on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. A single blow from an axe cut the rope that held the large four-sided platform, and the prisoners (except for one whose rope had broken and who had to be re-hanged) fell to their deaths. The second-largest mass execution was also a hanging: the execution of 13 African-American soldiers for taking part in the Houston Riot of 1917. The largest non-military mass execution occurred in one of the original thirteen colonies in 1723, when 26 convicted pirates were hanged in Newport, Rhode Island by order of the Admiralty Court.
This is from the Innocence Project that seeks to exonerate innocent people in the American judicial system through DNA testing.
There have been 311 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States.

• The first DNA exoneration took place in 1989. Exonerations have been won in 36 states; since 2000, there have been 244 exonerations.

• 18 of the 311 people exonerated through DNA served time on death row. Another 16 were charged with capital crimes but not sentenced to death.

• The average length of time served by exonerees is 13.6 years. The total number of years served is approximately 4,156.

• The average age of exonerees at the time of their wrongful convictions was 27.

Races of the 311 exonerees:

193 African Americans
94 Caucasians
22 Latinos
2 Asian American

• The true suspects and/or perpetrators have been identified in 152 of the DNA exoneration cases.

• Since 1989, there have been tens of thousands of cases where prime suspects were identified and pursued—until DNA testing (prior to conviction) proved that they were wrongly accused.

• In more than 25 percent of cases in a National Institute of Justice study, suspects were excluded once DNA testing was conducted during the criminal investigation (the study, conducted in 1995, included 10,060 cases where testing was performed by FBI labs).
They go on to explain why most innocents are wrongfully convicted in the U.S.
Leading Causes of Wrongful Convictions

These DNA exoneration cases have provided irrefutable proof that wrongful convictions are not isolated or rare events, but arise from systemic defects that can be precisely identified and addressed. For more than 15 years, the Innocence Project has worked to pinpoint these trends. Many wrongful convictions overturned with DNA testing involve multiple causes.

Eyewitness Misidentification Testimony was a factor in 72 percent percent of post-conviction DNA exoneration cases in the U.S., making it the leading cause of these wrongful convictions. At least 40 percent of these eyewitness identifications involved a cross racial identification (race data is currently only available on the victim, not for non-victim eyewitnesses). Studies have shown that people are less able to recognize faces of a different race than their own. These suggested reforms are embraced by leading criminal justice organizations and have been adopted in the states of New Jersey and North Carolina, large cities like Minneapolis and Seattle, and many smaller jurisdictions. Read more.

Unvalidated or Improper Forensic Science played a role in approximately 50 percent of wrongful convictions later overturned by DNA testing. While DNA testing was developed through extensive scientific research at top academic centers, many other forensic techniques – such as hair microscopy, bite mark comparisons, firearm tool mark analysis and shoe print comparisons – have never been subjected to rigorous scientific evaluation. Meanwhile, forensics techniques that have been properly validated – such as serology, commonly known as blood typing – are sometimes improperly conducted or inaccurately conveyed in trial testimony. In other wrongful conviction cases, forensic scientists have engaged in misconduct. Read more.

False confessions and incriminating statements lead to wrongful convictions in approximately 25 percent of cases. 29 of the DNA exonerees pled guilty to crimes they did not commit. The Innocence Project encourages police departments to electronically record all custodial interrogations in their entirety in order to prevent coercion and to provide an accurate record of the proceedings.

Informants contributed to wrongful convictions in 18 percent of cases. Whenever informant testimony is used, the Innocence Project recommends that the judge instruct the jury that most informant testimony is unreliable as it may be offered in return for deals, special treatment, or the dropping of charges. Prosecutors should also reveal any incentive the informant might receive, and all communication between prosecutors and informants should be recorded.
Once in a while a door opens, and let's in the future. --- Graham Greene

captsunshine
Associate
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:03 am
Location: Maveli Land

Post by captsunshine »

Hello James.N.
It is wonderful to thrash these ideas out, with you.
If it is any consolation to you,I am in a similar quandary as are you.
I too,shudder at the idea of being a mute witness to the outrages committed on millions of hapless lives- mortal and otherwise.

But one has only to look at early and current events in history, to see how purpose of action - however well intentioned- spawns bigger monsters.
conundrum for many of us; and that is about making the distinctions between when to engage; or as Joseph Campbell might phrase it: " To participate "; and when to step back and ( let nature take it's course ) so to speak
That is the crux of this problem of choosing to act or not.
IMHO-
The word 'participate' is what best describes the manner in which we involve ourselves
in this'theatre'.
This would imply engaging a system without causing any imbalance- or alter it's state of entropy.
In other words- This is what rituals teach us- ie - How do different energy systems/levels play out, without losing the intrinsic nature or magnitude of the components- but at the same time achieve a state of transition as a unit whole. (How very 'unphysical' would that world be? 😎)
In the human context- that would mean a deeper communication between cultures in conflict- which would again mean less of unilateral imposition of ideas and actions
A hero would - in my feeble mind- not jump into a situation - clutching his bunch of values-
to apply them as a quick fix.
He will never be a Hero if he cannot see his adversary in himself and vice versa.
He is liberated from the shackles of that idea of his ,called Mind.
Wish I could put these ideas in a more coherent fashion!
Non-violence ... requires greater heroism than of brave soldiers ... The world does not accept today the idea of loving the enemy. Even in Christian Europe the principle of non-violence is ridiculed ... Christians do not understand the message of Jesus. It is necessary to deliver it over again in the way we can understand ...

- Gandhi - speech -1925

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Captsunshine you are most kind.

Indeed I think you have put your finger right on difficulty we all face. " Life's mystery " poses the challenge we all must confront as you thoughtfully suggest in " seeing ourselves in others ". As Joseph Campbell mentions in one of his exchanges with Bill Moyers in " The Power of Myth " episode about the crisis of the attempted suicide on the bridge where the policeman saves the young man by the risking of his own life when reaching out to save him and almost falling himself. When asked what prompted him to do so he replied: " I only knew I could not have lived another day of my life if I had let him go. " Joseph Campbell interprets this as a metaphysical breakthrough of consciousness in the understanding that " You and the other are one ".

In another reference he states that: " Jesus really had the eye "; and that his greatest teaching was perhaps that of " Love your enemy as yourself " because " he ( is ) yourself ". These are really tough and difficult ideas to integrate into daily living; especially for mere mortal human beings like ourselves; no? He also is able to distinguish the often nebulous nuances between the abstract understanding of unconditional love for one's fellow human beings and the more challenging reality of one's neighbor who may not be so reasonable in their own responses. ( I'm trying to recall without much success at the moment who it was that said: " I don't like that man over there; I need to get to know him better ". Maybe Will Rodgers; I'm not sure. ) :wink:

Buddhism; Taoism; and so many of these other various religious understandings have so very much to teach if we can only learn to listen; don't you think? That is if we can learn to decipher the differences between what separates us and what unites us. Joseph Campbell I think really has helped to " connect a lot those dots or points " for many of us. I know he has for me. ( I would only add here that I don't think a " formula " is what he is talking about. That is where the " Mystery " aspect may play a role. I'm still working on that one. ) :lol:

As for " World Peace " well; I'm still working on that one too; as well as " Climate Change "; Nuclear Dis-Armament "; " World Hunger " and the rest of my" Wish List for Santa Claus " this year!

BTW; I thought you expressed your ideas very well.

Cheers :)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

captsunshine
Associate
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:03 am
Location: Maveli Land

Post by captsunshine »

Thank you James!
es in others ". As Joseph Campbell mentions in one of his exchanges with Bill Moyers in " The Power of Myth " episode about the crisis of the attempted suicide on the bridge where the policeman saves the young man by the risking of his own life when reaching out to save him and almost falling himself. When asked what prompted him to do so he replied: " I only knew I could not have lived another day of my life
Yes I think he quotes Schopenhauer in remarking,how we are able to see others,
as extensions of our being.

In another reference he states that: " Jesus really had the eye "; and that his greatest teaching was perhaps that of " Love your enemy as yourself " because " he ( is ) yourself ". These are really tough and difficult ideas to integrate into daily living; especially for mere mortal human beings like ourselves; no? He also is able to distinguish the often nebulous nuances between the abstract understanding of unconditional love for one's fellow human beings and the more challenging reality of one's neighbour who may not be so reasonable.
An Ideology or thought system that would extol the virtues of altruism, in the face ofmortal danger, is merely interested in sacrificing human lives for its 'upkeep'.
But the whole paradigm changes when humans sacrifice, life, limb or property- out of spontaneous and intrinsic desire to do so- in order to preserve and protect another life
(Mortal or otherwise).
This is what all scriptures and prayers and penances focus upon and myths enshrine.
Jesus and Buddha and Krishna show us this path.But to me - it's none more than Jesus,
who lived and died celebrating this Godliness in Man.
Life's Mystery- IMHO is a direct function of who you think you are.
The question we need to ask is how do we prepare ourselves to ride the wave than be carried away, while trying to figure out why the wave happened in the first place.
Non-violence ... requires greater heroism than of brave soldiers ... The world does not accept today the idea of loving the enemy. Even in Christian Europe the principle of non-violence is ridiculed ... Christians do not understand the message of Jesus. It is necessary to deliver it over again in the way we can understand ...

- Gandhi - speech -1925

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

Captsunshine:
An Ideology or thought system that would extol the virtues of altruism, in the face ofmortal danger, is merely interested in sacrificing human lives for its 'upkeep'.
But the whole paradigm changes when humans sacrifice, life, limb or property- out of spontaneous and intrinsic desire to do so- in order to preserve and protect another life
(Mortal or otherwise).
This is what all scriptures and prayers and penances focus upon and myths enshrine.
Jesus and Buddha and Krishna show us this path.But to me - it's none more than Jesus,
who lived and died celebrating this Godliness in Man.
Life's Mystery- IMHO is a direct function of who you think you are.
The question we need to ask is how do we prepare ourselves to ride the wave than be carried away, while trying to figure out why the wave happened in the first place.
Very nicely put Captsunshine. 8)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

CarmelaBear
Associate
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: The Land of Enchantment

Post by CarmelaBear »

Jesus was a man. The virtues he promoted are not natural to men with testosterone surging through their bodies. For women, being nice is more natural.

Now, there are always exceptions, but generally, the morality of Jesus is a man thing. For you guys, being kind and gentle kicks up issues of homophobia and it goes against the grain that says "tough and violent is necessary and crucial". For some guys, there appears to be no acceptable alternative to violence.

For some men, it feels like hurting people just happens.

~
Once in a while a door opens, and let's in the future. --- Graham Greene

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

CarmelaBear wrote:Jesus was a man. The virtues he promoted are not natural to men with testosterone surging through their bodies. For women, being nice is more natural.

Now, there are always exceptions, but generally, the morality of Jesus is a man thing. For you guys, being kind and gentle kicks up issues of homophobia and it goes against the grain that says "tough and violent is necessary and crucial". For some guys, there appears to be no acceptable alternative to violence.

For some men, it feels like hurting people just happens.

~

Carmela my friend; I really could not disagree more with the majority of this whole post however well intentioned. IMHO the mistaking of a " cultural influence " for inherent " biological and psychological " propensities is just not even in the rational ball park. The notion of an idea that " boys don't know better than to be destined to grow up to be brutes " is not any more correct than one that says " girls should remain pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen ". I told my daughter to never think " any man " is better than she is. Any child of either gender is " never inferior or superior " to another; no matter what the " social conditioning " that culture promotes.

( I seriously hope that is not what you were implying ); but I would suggest concerning your post that this is what the whole direction of much of Joseph Campbell's work is all about. As Bill Moyers pointed out in " The Power of Myth " how it helped to free him in breaking through the " cultural prisons " which had held him in bondage; ( ignorance is the real enemy here ); and something we all as human beings must constantly be on guard against. People can assume many incorrect things from ( social imprints ) in ways so subtle that sometimes they can be oblivious to their influence.

So I would ask you to clarify this a little more if there is a specific point you are trying to make here. ( Perhaps I am missing something. )
:?
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

CarmelaBear
Associate
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: The Land of Enchantment

Post by CarmelaBear »

Look at two institutions: prisons and the military. Men dominate. Men have to work to become gentle and trusting. Women have to stretch to become criminals and warriors. We do it, but it requires special effort. Oxytocin is a natural substance produced by human bodies. It causes feelings of compassion, love and trust. Like estrogen, it had been associated with women, and it increases with events that are all about love (weddings, pregnancy, nursing, etc.).

Testosterone is all about action, courage and risk-taking. Estrogen is about gentle nurturing and empathy. Both genders have both hormones. When they are produced in differing quantities across gender lines, they have profound and dramatic effects upon human feeling and behavior, notwithstanding our best efforts and finest ideals.

Women's bodies produce more estrogen and oxytocin, natural substances that are associated with the behaviors reflected in the expressed values of great religious leaders, (who are usually men without family burdens).

The body does influence feelings and conduct, and this is borne out by the fact that women continue to feel strong biological and social pressure to have and maintain families. In close interpersonal relationships, men are starting to feel the pressure to make and nurture families, which furthers the social aim of creating cheap, unfulfilled labor willing to kill and die for the status quo.

Here's the irony: patriarchal institutions are not catching up with this new nurturing, family-supporting role for men and gays. American society brazenly favors the mother over the father, parents over grand parents and straight folk over the GLBT community. The system lacks equality for men and women in the role of loving and protective parent. If they don't work out differences privately, the courts will usually give women the upper hand in child custody matters. All the while, the economic system is abandoning the family with ruthless, very un-Christlike greed.

For women, the big stumbling blocks are lesser pay for equal work and discrimination in hiring and promotion.

The ideal would be equality in the work place, with personal safety as a given. Real equality would free both sexes from having to find fulfillment in parenthood to the exclusion of larger forms of compassion for ourselves and the human community. The system neglects people in favor of reinforcing enslavement of individuals in the industrial enterprise. Preocupied with family duties and the bright shiny objects of god-like offspring, our institutions remain in the firm grip of a stressed-out 1% who own our system of governance and manipulate the sex drive and the consequent neglect of individuals and families.

The law is not about you and me. It's about money and the military protection of lopsided economic and social entitlements. So, while women face the glass ceiling, men are channeled away from effective human relationships. Every single one of us is required to stay out of the business of democratic governance and socio-economic reform.

Our beloved American institutions have been hijacked through a mythology of the conquest of nature and the monopolization of institutions of economic systems of governance. They keep us locked into gender roles. They enforce a detour away from the world of blissful work and collective goodwill and social functioning. We are moved toward raising families through competitive struggle and hardship.

The system has the potential to function in the best interests of the people, and it now belongs to the paranoia of nuclear risk, perpetual war, fossil fuel madness, overpopulation and a world divided into the very rich corporations and the impossibly overwhelmed families.


Men who want compassionate relationships are relegated to the roles of sperm donors and frustrated breadwinners. If they rise in the ranks and earn more, the men are estranged from their own happiness and from the patriarchal institutions that have the potential to work for those whose lives are most affected by them.

Women are baby makers and raisers without freedom from continued patriarchal domination. The Jesus love is confined to extremely effective pressure to sacrifice for parenthood and to serve the masters of corporate and military might. Beyond that, we do not own and nurture our own lives, our institutions or our Earth habitat.

All the Jesus ideals are aimed at being polite and politically correct for the sake of interpersonal harmony that keeps our noses out of the big forces that run everything. You can swoon over getting laid, struggle over protecting families, but God forbid you might be taken seriously by the Big Institutions that tie you up in knots.

Biology steers women toward kind nurturance. Biology pushes men to use whatever means they can find to either protect the babies or run away from them. The body rolls out very un-Christian chemical courage and risk-taking.

Beyond the gravitational pull of biological and social imperatives, there be dragons.

~
Once in a while a door opens, and let's in the future. --- Graham Greene

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

JamesN. wrote:
CarmelaBear wrote:Jesus was a man. The virtues he promoted are not natural to men with testosterone surging through their bodies. For women, being nice is more natural.

Now, there are always exceptions, but generally, the morality of Jesus is a man thing. For you guys, being kind and gentle kicks up issues of homophobia and it goes against the grain that says "tough and violent is necessary and crucial". For some guys, there appears to be no acceptable alternative to violence.

For some men, it feels like hurting people just happens.

~

Carmela my friend; I really could not disagree more with the majority of this whole post however well intentioned. IMHO the mistaking of a " cultural influence " for inherent " biological and psychological " propensities is just not even in the rational ball park. The notion of an idea that " boys don't know better than to be destined to grow up to be brutes " is not any more correct than one that says " girls should remain pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen ". I told my daughter to never think " any man " is better than she is. Any child of either gender is " never inferior or superior " to another; no matter what the " social conditioning " that culture promotes.

( I seriously hope that is not what you were implying ); but I would suggest concerning your post that this is what the whole direction of much of Joseph Campbell's work is all about. As Bill Moyers pointed out in " The Power of Myth " how it helped to free him in breaking through the " cultural prisons " which had held him in bondage; ( ignorance is the real enemy here ); and something we all as human beings must constantly be on guard against. People can assume many incorrect things from ( social imprints ) in ways so subtle that sometimes they can be oblivious to their influence.

So I would ask you to clarify this a little more if there is a specific point you are trying to make here. ( Perhaps I am missing something. )
:?

___________________________________________________



Carmela; Thank you for your thoughts regarding my response.


My disagreement with your premise was here:
the mistaking of a " cultural influence " for inherent " biological and psychological " propensities
And:
Any child of either gender is " never inferior or superior " to another; no matter what the " social conditioning " that culture promotes.
The issue that frames my point is here:

I would suggest concerning your post that this is what the whole direction of much of Joseph Campbell's work is all about. As Bill Moyers pointed out in " The Power of Myth " how it helped to free him in breaking through the " cultural prisons " which had held him in bondage; ( ignorance is the real enemy here ); and something we all as human beings must constantly be on guard against. People can assume many incorrect things from ( social imprints ) in ways so subtle that sometimes they can be oblivious to their influence.

Indeed social injustice throughout history in ( whatever ) form it takes is part of humanity's continuing struggle toward social equality. But to confuse this with a notion of a biological preprogramed psychology that is inherent within the gender is not the same as applying this to the anthropological roles that they serve as a species; nor the ability to transcend any disrespectful, inappropriate, or destructive behavior patterns as taught within the given proper social context.

Carmela these issues you are describing concerning the abuse and disrespect of women no one who is aware would disagree with given the specific areas to which they apply. But to sweep with such a broad brush stroke and imply that this is a species driven behavior I just don't think is what Joseph Campbell was pointing toward. Throughout much of his massive research he points time and again to the various cultural shifts throughout human history; ( such as the " Goddess " centric cultures as well as the male dominated ); and shows how it is the " cultural dynamic " that the mythological dimension must illuminate and transcend. Here IMHO is where the true battle-line lies.

In addition to the above I would add that there are some very good points you raise here about how " both " genders are affected by much of the societal pressures that are forced upon them. But in the end I think whether by the society one lives in or the historical context to which it is applied it is the ( mythical dimension ) that gives humanity it's best hope for survival in the " larger scheme of things ".

I can think of no better example in modern times of the feminine warrior role that illustrates this than Pakistan's " Malala Yousafzi " in her quest for all girls; and ( all children ) in their inalienable human right to an education. And this is to me how humanity may one day free itself from the terrible yoke of ignorance and the suffering it causes all over the world.



Cheers my friend. :)
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

captsunshine
Associate
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:03 am
Location: Maveli Land

Post by captsunshine »

Dear Carmela,
The intelligent passionate woman that you are,and yet you have fallen prey to generalisations based on prejudices that have imprisoned your brilliant mind.
Please understand that you cannot chemically categorise behaviour and mental disposition as male and female.
First of all psychosomatic or the effect of the mind over the body is more profound than the body over the mind.
The effect of environment around an individual and the impulses he /she obtains from it ,have a direct bearing in shaping the mind and hence the body.
The is no dichotomy of body and mind.
one is the extension of the other and both are reflections of the environs that nurture- or you can say-condition us.
. We - in the East believe that mind and the body are one entity
Your premise that Jesus advocated love and compassion which contradict the
proclivities of a testosterone laden body - is quaint and naive.
Jesus fulfilled the role demanded in a ritual sacrifice, by holding steadfast to his ideas
and thereby entering into a conflict with the establishment - knowing only too well the consequences.
Now that is someone- I would as a male - love to emulate- he is a source of endless inspiration and hope. As a Hindu,I find in him an ocean of kindness and love just like my Dark one - Lord Krishna -and that is because he - like Krishna - also embodies inexhaustible, irrepressible ,universal energy.
Jesus symbolizes tremendous strength tempered by Compassion and tenderness.
This is the ultimate destiny of man.
The marrying of Shiva and Shakthi.
The Yin and Yang.
The perfect wheel powered by coupling forces - The real Swastika.
Or as J.C would see in tune with ones centre.
Oh! How can you not but see all these symbols staring at you?
Unfortunately no Christian could not even begin to comprehend the depth of meaning of Christhood .

There is no Gender for love or compassion. Nor is there for violence and terror
Hell! there is no language for it either.
It flows like our breath- which is neither male or female nor having a tongue of its own
Non-violence ... requires greater heroism than of brave soldiers ... The world does not accept today the idea of loving the enemy. Even in Christian Europe the principle of non-violence is ridiculed ... Christians do not understand the message of Jesus. It is necessary to deliver it over again in the way we can understand ...

- Gandhi - speech -1925

CarmelaBear
Associate
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: The Land of Enchantment

Post by CarmelaBear »

Here is my analogy, to take my point in a less myth-and-gender-burdened place. Every child in my original family of eight siblings inherited a gene for near-sightedness. Some of us did more eye-straining reading than others. The heavy readers have the worst eyesight. We all had some near-sightedness. My patient is from a family without that myopia gene, and none wear glasses. They all read a lot, and enjoy 20-20 vision.

Biology can definitely affect us. Chimpanzees and Bonobos tell the tale.

Yes, the mind can and does influence,and the twentieth century proved beyond all doubt what patriarchal mythology can do when mixed with the genetics of gender. The male-led Constantine Church protected the Jew-hating male-led Nazis. Strict social gender roles played their part as Oppenheimer and the Japanese Emperor-God fulfilled their patriarchal roles as bringers of death.

Tell me how all the heroes could resist following the dominant mythology of old. It informed their every chess move. The demise of the King is checkmate.

The myth brush is broad, and it painted the wars in red blood.

Patriarchy is social, and genetic propensities are biological. Sometimes they work in tandem. Sometimes they resist each other.

Campbell said we think the brain is our master, but it is not. We are subject to what happens "down there".....his choice of words. We are magnificent creatures delivered of women who, historically, did not choose when and how to give birth. When humanity frees women of reproductive tyranny, there will be a change for the better for everyone.

I stand by this.

~
Last edited by CarmelaBear on Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:28 am, edited 3 times in total.
Once in a while a door opens, and let's in the future. --- Graham Greene

CarmelaBear
Associate
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: The Land of Enchantment

Post by CarmelaBear »

Name one tippy tippy top leader who is the last of at least three closely-born siblings. They do not exist.

Leadership is mostly for first borns and sometimes for middlings. Last borns who are raised in close physical and chronological proximity to older siblings do not reach the top of the Big Heirarchies.

Any exception makes the rule.

~
Once in a while a door opens, and let's in the future. --- Graham Greene

CarmelaBear
Associate
Posts: 4087
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 3:51 pm
Location: The Land of Enchantment

Post by CarmelaBear »

If we had a functional, intelligent government, we would need to end tax breaks for the fossil fuel industry. Check this out.

http://harvardmagazine.com/2014/01/the- ... ssil-fuels

JamesN.
Associate
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 2:46 am
Location: Nashville, Tn.

Post by JamesN. »

I have debated about where to post this item since it deals specifically with money, power, manipulation, Law, " Free Speech ", and the Supreme Court. And after some post jostling back and forth I have decided this is the proper place. ( The court's decision on these influences I personally feel are going to play a determining factor in the coming election season and may have a direct impact on the direction this country as a democracy could take. )

I think many folks have some of these same concerns about this issue as well. ( I wonder how Joseph Campbell would interpret this? ) Perhaps some of you have thoughts also. ( Incidently; this post is not intended as a rant. )



http://news.yahoo.com/youtube-video-pur ... .html?vp=1
What do I know? - Michael de Montaigne

Locked