[Acting Like Godot]

"Suppleness of perspective" (as used in this thread), is not to be confused with "inconsistency" (as used in this thread). I can agree that I am supple with my perspective. I do not agree that I am inconsistent.

As a matter of fact, I am highly consistent in this discussion. My highly consistent position may be neatly summarised in five words:

"Your thoughts create your reality."

I challenge anyone to demonstrate that I have been inconsistent about the above. Inconsistency in fact is highly disadvantageous if you seek to manifest a certain desired goal. If you keep changing your mind, you get nowhere.

"Suppleness of perspective" is an entirely different matter. It is about mindfulness. It is about conscious choice. It is about deliberately selecting the perspectives that work best for you.

It is most certainly not self-delusion. Consider a simple illustration.

Take two sane people, X and Y, and place them in an identical situation (eg the same kind of job). Both X and Y may have similar backgrounds (in terms of prior work experience, educational qualifications etc).

Now, it is entirely possible that X and Y will express very different opinions about their similar jobs. For example:

1. X says: "The work here is really complicated. I love it! It's so challenging and I'll get to grow and learn a lot."

2. Y says: "The work here is really complicated. I hate it! It's so challenging and I'm going to be very stressed & unhappy working here."

In either case, you can see that the person is not delusional. X has an opinion, and justifiable reasons for it. Y has a very different opinion, and he also has justifiable reasons for it.

However, their reasons are exactly the same - that their work is complicated and challenging. In other words, the exact same situation supports a variety of different possible and justifiable perspectives.

Now, let us say a 3rd person, Z, is now placed in the same position as X and Y. Z has the same work experience, qualifications etc as X and Y. Also, Z happens to be a LOA practitioner.

Now, if X is not delusional, then clearly it would not be delusional for Z to adopt the same perspective as X.

Similarly, if Y is not delusional, then clearly it would not be delusional for Z to adopt the same perspective as Y.

Z, being a LOA practitioner, and possessing adequate suppleness of perspective, considers his situation, is mindful of his thoughts, and consciously opts to adopt the same perspective as X.

Well done, Z! Now you've created a job for yourself, that you really love, and is complicated and challenging that you'll get to grow and learn a lot!

Now, if you really must say that anyone is delusional, then I say that the prime candidate is Y. (And it's the kind of delusion that Eckhart Tolle discusses at length in his books). Y mistakes the running commentary in his own mind, as "objective" reality (which, of course, doesn't really exist) - in other words, he believes that his job is really "objectively" awful, when in fact all its awfulness exists in his own mind.

For instance, if Y takes thoughts like these far enough:

"The work here is really complicated. I hate it! It's so challenging and I'm going to be very stressed & unhappy working here."

.... then Y will grow tired, he will grow depressed, he might turn to alcohol, he may even kill himself.

But did "objective" reality truly cause him to kill himself? Or was it his own thoughts, and the reality that his thoughts ultimately created for him? Go ponder.

Now is Z, the LOA practitioner, insane to deliberately choose his thoughts? Is he self-delusional to consciously exercise suppleness in selecting his perspective?

That is what John will tell you.

However, I see Z as simply being wise. What say you?

"A wise man, recognizing that the world is but an illusion, does not act as if it is real, so he escapes the suffering." - Gautama Buddha