What are your thoughts on:
- Do you agree that our current systems are fundamentally dependent on temptation?
- That through this the people are/have been conditioned into a fantasy dreamworld? That this has created the consumerists?
a) It always depends on how deep one follows to roots to the well
While tend to seek the very lowest reach of the root, it's also evident that solving issues at the surface by taking care of the deepest point wont' work with human behavior, people can't follow and kill the messenger
, virtually nowadays, literally a few decades ago with some regional exceptions.
Hence I on one hand agree with your statement but think it's worth there are even deeper "dependences" to you your term or roots to use mine.
Temptatin is based on curiosity at best and on rivalry at worst.
Rivalry is based on ego and since ego is neutral, necessary to survive and deadly when
uncontrolled, the solutions to all this is "EGO-CONTROL", means that ethics based on
understanding and sincere motives, willing to pay a personal price for things to be done right
and being ready to lose to remain as clean as possible with our doings.
Best example to explain this is real love against interest based love. If we love we are ready to step back, to lose, to pay, to forego, just to make the person we love happy or prepare the path for
a good life.
Interest based love, no matter what the interest/motivation is, will only work as long as both interests are in some kind of sync, a range of how much we are willing to give/share to
remain within our own range to reach our goals.
In short, ego is a tool that we have to use responsibly and the check list are ethics, easy to verify to change the side like turning a chess board 180° too see things from the other side. If we accept a move by our opponent, we can consider the possibility to act the same way.
b) I call this illusionism and concur while the tip of the root is in the very vicinity of a) that illustrates very well why it depends on how deep we follow the roots. Let's say a) and b) share a long way down to the tip while only at the very end they split into tiny ends and stay very close so that we have apparently 2 topics while in fact they are from the same branch, if we solve a), b) does not exist.
Last but not least, illusions work on both sides, evil meant and well meant. A well meaning Illusionist will achieve nothing while the evil meaning illusionist will achive a lot and that explains in parts why up to this day the evil prevails, it's easier to succeed and rivalry advertises success.
Whenever someone is pointing at a soo.... successful guy, i mostly can only either shut up or express that illusionary success in my opinion is a fail and means doom for the masses of sheep following the illusionists over the cliff, to use that common image
BTW:
The never ending discussion what is "On Topic" and what's "Off Topic" as well depends on how far down a branch we are willing or allowing to dig, or in other words, how many ramifications
we allow in a discussion. For those who think very holistic, everything is "on topic" and for those who either THINK in fields of expertise or those who are narrow minded, almost everything that can be seen as a separate branch is "Off Topic"
Since these are very personal preferences and part of personalities, it will never be possible to share views in detail, hence we need rules and someone who ultimately decides, else anarchy would be the result and that's not a valid option as well.
For me it's very difficult to be muted by such rules but then as mentioned the alternative is anarchy and that's definitely worse. I mention this because I've seen one of your posts that blow a similar horn along my own line of thinking