At what point do you stop asking the question why?

I thought on my way to work:

When a perception I have is put into words it is my responsibility to analyze my inner dialogue and hold it up against what else I know before I voice it . However, I am a biological creature and do not have a view of everything and can only know what my limited view has shown me. I embrace this attitude of humility because although I have given much time and thought to the question – why our world is, like it is, I cannot presume to know, without deeper questioning the extent of another experience. Or the extent of the ancestral histories that add weight to the experience. I see a lot of deeper histories left out of dialogues, often in order to add gravity to a particular experience. So with that in mind I think the real solution is not to control the narrative by powerful policy but to share on a big scale a searching and open dialogue. It is easy to find reasons to discount another voice, it is much harder to find love and allow another to explore the depth of their experience. Real, honest thoughts are fragile, tenuous and easily destroyed, and destroying a heart causes anger and frustration in that heart. Some say anger and hate is inevitable because we are emotional creatures, but how do we choose what perception gets all the emotional passion? It is part of responsibility to take a deeper look at what is hurting a fellow man, not searching for reasons to hate and create emotions too hard to quench with love.

Traditions and evolving conscience.

There are some traditions, ancient in nature, that may seem cruel and hard to a modern world doing nothing more to procure food than drive a fuel powered vehicle to the store…Which to me makes it quite obvious that this ‘modern’ culture doesn’t really know what is best for everyone with this top down approach to consciousness. I say this because it’s not sustainable if all the billions of people lived that way.

People for ages have sought to separate themselves from that harshness that can come from tradition. The world is changing very fast though and obliterating traditions in a rush to make everyone represent values that are not for all seems destructive in the name of a progress that isn’t always progressive when it dampens the spirit of those that feel differently.  Just because something works for one person does not mean it works for another.  This argument is usually used against more conservative traditions but is equally righteous when families want the freedom to be in community in a way that isn’t always tolerant to modern thought. While traditions should not ignore the evolution of consciousness, the evolution of consciousness is deeper than the speedy change in mentality that many progressives try to force upon everyone just because they feel that their way is better or more enlightened. While stereotyping is vulgar, political correctness seems to be used in the same spirit.  Is this the grey area that we should concentrate our respect towards?

The ancient tale of the hero’s journey comes to mind.

Dare I say that Nelson Mandela’s story is a courageous example of the hero’s journey. It is told that he was to marry into the tribe where he was born and to live there with that community.  He wanted something different so he left to seek a way of life that he perhaps could feel more authentic about, perhaps he knew he had something more to do. In his bravery he changed the world and re-wrote history for many that got stuck in that grey area of not being allowed to seek an authentic life.

I wonder about those he left behind, what world do they belong to?

As the modern world changes and people create new community based on very different circumstances will we remember what a man like Mandela came from? Are they holding on to something important?

I like studying the emotional life of whale pods. They really stick together naturally.

neutral has meaning here.

i think it is great when policies are watched, when people care about them being created and think them through to the ends.  also keeping them as simple as possible. communications policy is a place for thinkers for sure. there is always an open door for creating opportunities in ways that create light and positivity if we allow. it could be taken as foolishness to do so as the cynicism runs deep but it is also, i think, hopeful and i would enjoy if i could help keep a positive way alive. i feel that the netherlands, in making a statement for innovative communication, keeps those communications far, far reaching. open, noticed by anyone who finds the connection. good decision making is so huge and communication lines closing feels unnatural and if too much power is held over the decisions… how could we think for ourselves? everyone is different. i listen.

ars article, netherlands becomes worlds second net neutrality country.

i would rather not give in to conspiracy or media/ice-sheet-darkness. of course one does not want to be ignorant of happenings but we cannot see or know everything. i relate to the indigenous way of living with nature, starting close and staying close to ancestors, family, neighbors, or those relations that are born of like-mindedness (which is easier to bring into touch through open communication). real people with real stories. not so much at the at0mic speed or time, cut and ticking on to something only based on a concept of order.  unless that power is of the most dire need.

could that condensed reality really be necessary to harness?

perhaps, perhaps not but the statistics and even recorded history correlate with the necessity, that power, being a part of how humans have reacted in the past, not just one name of one person, is showing an important pattern.  names seem to become symbols of what is made into a seeming scape goat for bad behavior.

later the symbol becomes another name and the game of not connecting the dots continues the chase of who to blame.  blame a name, very distracting indeed.

even rabbit guides

don’t go fast as light.

the cat would have pointed out

it’s not a chase.

the magic is not

insisting on seeing the spark or pointing it out

compressing it to it’s limit.

rather letting it be

movement and light.

i’ve learned from some that good decision making starts early and when compressed too much, can get hot.  Too much heat and you have a meltdown. To little and you never have a spark. But what is the baseline?

It’s all connected.

here is a picture of spiko creating cool shadows.

spiko frame