Intent

No no. The fat doesn’t matter at all - as long as you get it from the right tit.
8-[

Personally I’m right handed – so – O:)

Hahahaha…

Damn bro…

I don’t want to think about making that a part of my signature…

:astonished:

:astonished: #-o Uh, that was not a response I was prepared for.

That wasn’t your intent? :confused:

I can tell you that cows get no Joy when you grab the wrong rudy tit. =;

sigh

Maximum integral joy over time is: hypermania. HyperMania has no morality.

Obsrvr, do me a favor someday and debate me using just the quotes of James.

You’ll see the difference.

Not finding as much evidence as I’d hoped, Obsrvr. I have the hardest time searching the internet. Google sucks. The 90s Netscape Navigator was loads better. I’ll post whatever else I find. Was trying to find a definitive psychology definition of whether or not peace is an emotion. One did say that peace is the purest form of happiness.

Raising the white flag on searching, Obsrvr.

I’d like to move beyond intent to honesty.

Am I honest with myself?

Struggling so hard with this one. Recently, a thread was started about our biggest fears. Well, if our fears are omnipresent, how do we outgrow them, all of them?

Maybe my greatest fear is being honest with myself. Why do I fear myself?

Just today I started to wonder - after almost completing James’ physics of psychology thread - “what to do about it” - exactly what is abstractly required to alter a person’s condition of attitudes - their fears and hopes. The MSM is doing it all the time - so there has to be a formula of some kind. And I’m sure instilling a fear is much easier than getting rid of it - but I’m still studying.

I have just started his “Schooling of Emma” story - an amazing story. It reveals a few practical ideas. Maybe something will pop up. In the mean time - MIJOT is the guide. :smiley:

But what did you mean by “not honest with yourself”? :-k

Speaking of peace : I have an abundance of peace.
I recently did some standard meditations today.
Instead of my own forms of meditation.
It seemed easier, but shorter.
It was good though.

My peace is like a big tree by a river.

My peace is like clouds covering the whole sky.

When you remove your attachments,
the free space left behind is naturally
filled with peace and tranquility.
Or at least, it can potentially
be filled with peace and tranquility.

Regarding self regulation, I am always maintaining (what I perceive) the middle of the road in everything I do, not too good(with what is the intent to do great things, ideal aspirations) against not too bad (with what is the intent to go hog wild without enough outward contentiousness) where my intent is purely selfish without concern for ethics or legality. As I am trying not to over or under estimate myself, I am saying that I don’t trust myself. If I honestly trusted myself, why am I always putting on the brakes?

It seems like you are saying that the US Senate and House of Representatives should trust each other and not quarrel. But I don’t see how you weave “honesty” into it. You seem to be saying that you are honestly seeing the conflict between the lower level urges and the higher level thoughtfulness. So where is the dishonesty coming in?

The lack of honesty stems from my lack of trust in what my intent may escalate into(along the lines that “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions”)if I go full throttle, can I honestly do it without harming others or myself, and if my boldness starts to spin out of control will I be honest with myself about what is compelling me to want to continue? Honest enough to begin braking again? Maybe I cannot fathom what a trickle of empowerment is or maybe I cannot understand or accept that going full throttle is not sustainable. There is definitely conflict at the crux of what I am trying to explain and it hinges not only on my competency, but also on my fortitude.

So I don’t see this as an “honesty” issue - but a fear that your deep-state urges are not healthy or wise - but you don’t have the courage or discipline to counter them.

Let me think about that a bit. O:)

If James’ revelations about the East and West are right (and he almost invariably was) the following is true -

And according to Boris Johnson, Merkel, and O’Biden the G7 are aiming exactly toward that goal (James proven to hit the mark again).

I see this as an attempt to make the East into a neo-Adam, the West into neo-Eve, and the global surveillance conglomerate playing the role of God - all to produce their “Paradise” in the neo-Garden of Eden.

Now - what does all of that have to do with you -

I am thinking that there is a natural shared dependency between the masculine and feminine. They need each other for more than merely making babies. It seems very common for women to recognize that they don’t feel completely in control of themselves and seek a male to lightly dominate them just to keep them more stable (of course we are never supposed to say that - and certainly never believe it).

And as the West is intentionally feminized - chaos and discomfort reigns. Eventually I think the plan is for the West to feel the need for the dominate East to keep them more stable - because they won’t be allowed to manage it for themselves.

If I am reading you right (not 100% that I am) - you are expressing that female who needs a little bit of masculine help stabilizing herself - a mild domination to give a better sense of inner peace. Your House and Senate need a stronger President (exactly like the US right now).

And before I guess at what kind of strategy would help with that - am I totally off base?

There is no yin and yang.

There is no masculine or feminine.

There is only one goal and one goal alone…

Every being in existence fulfill all their desires at nobodies expense.

People are defined by having the ultimate goal (The one above) or a lesser goal - any other goal besides the one above.

This idea would always fail. Humans need challenges to accomplish growth. If everything is easy, you learn nothing.

So you’re going to be a dictator and say that everyone needs to learn something or something at your pace.

People live forever Wendy … the question is who’s pace they learn it at!

Yours? Mine? Or theirs?

I choose theirs

Your proposal, nobody learns anything because there is no struggle. You need obstacles to overcome your limitations or can’t you even admit that?

Wendy,

It is precisely that I had to learn at someone else’s pace that I am what I am. I would not wish this upon any other being.

Let me give an example:

You’re walking past a person on the sidewalk going the opposite direction as them. When you two are about to pass each other, they very quickly pull out a knife and stab you in the belly. And continue walking.

What’s the lesson there?

Nobody wants that.

I think it’s extremely narcissistic of you to think existence is only meaningful if someone learns everything you learn.

I wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy.