[Cado]

Originally Posted by joyfulgrowth

That's one of the reasons I am still a bit doubtful about this whole polarization thing. It seems to invite people to either totally focus on selfishness or selflessness.

Where did I do that? I know you're not speaking to me personally, but I think my post represents the two sides fairly well. All I did is place emphasis on an aspect of "altruism" which is oft ignored.

I would rather invite us to a path of self-fulness - not in the sense of ego, but learning to be increasingly present with the life flowing through us, whether we are striving to meet needs like meaning, contribution and support or rather ones that only have to do with us as individuals. I believe that many of the problems attributed to "lack of polarization" or "lightworker's/darkworker's syndrome" could be solved that way. If you manage to be fully present, the life in you and in others doesn't need to be contradictory at all.

That sounds great on paper but we're dualistic beings by design. That doesn't mean the two halves can't be reconciled into one whole; in fact, I would argue that's the whole point of polarization. The two paths end in the same place. You're just deciding where you'll begin and how you'll progress.

My other doubt is that I have seen various threads on this where people write "I want to polarize because I want... This comes from a lack of... in my life". I am highly doubtful that doing anything from a lack-based motivation would be successful on the long run. If you are truly connected to your longing to (e.g.) have more intimacy in your life and based on that make a conscious choice to polarize, fine. But based on lack?

You most likely learned that terminology because you sought ways to remedy your own lack, yes?

Everyone starts somewhere. Starting with lack does not mean ending with lack. It is the catalyst, it is the push. And I would say any worldview which lacks... lack, is... lacking. There are always things that can improve. It's simply a matter of your perspective.