@ku'el: I don't claim to be able to define love. It's an irreducible concept, like anger - if you've ever experienced it, you know what it is. If you haven't, no amount of definition will be sufficient.
But that would be dodging the challenge. If you held me over a laser-equipped shark tank and told me to define love or else, I would call it both the movement of consciousness towards integration and removal of illusory barriers between entities (i.e. "we are all one"), and the positive experience which results when this is perceived and the limited ego is at least partially or temporarily transcended.
Insofar as subjective reality applies, I guess there is no need for lightworker/darkworker encounters to take place. But there's also the issue of how we affect others. When our auras or whatever are powerful, we tend to drag weaker ones with us - being in the presence of a very peaceful person makes us feel more peaceful, being in the presence of a highly evolved person can accelerate our own growth. When I spend a lot of time near strongly fear-based people, and listen to them rant angrily or feel them radiate fear or hatred (not to generalise - those are merely the ones I've met), I start to feel the pressure of similar feelings, and the lowering of my own consciousness. So I think the more polarised you are, the more you polarise your environment.
Besides, to boil it down to the simplest level, if you have a "lightworker" political candidate and a "darkworker" political candidate on the same platform, there will be conflict, and if one is much more powerful than the other and the audience, they will take control. Witness Hitler.
I don't pretend to understand just where objective and subjective reality meet, but I think that stronger people who are aligned with any given principle will impose their reality on weaker ones who are undecided (though neutrality, of course, can also be a principle when pursued deliberately).
@Narz and ku'el: if the opposite of fear is confidence, or if you have no fear, what is your motivation?
When my motivation is to find happiness through external things and events, I always find some sort of fear at the core - fear of being insufficient, fear of annihilation, basically fear that without them I shall not be happy or complete or valuable. When I do not have this motivation, I believe that I am already all those things merely by virtue of existing, and I associate this with love, because that is what I experience. My motivation is then purely giving and creative (because I don't feel that I need to take to be happy).
Also, if lightworker/darkworker are unhelpful terms, someone needs to devise clearer ones. I just use "lightworker", in this context, as shorthand for "I'm using Steve's polarisation model, and referring to those who polarise towards love/outflow".
@nownow: Aren't motive and direction the same thing in this model? If your motive is giving, your direction is outflow. If your motive is personal gain, your direction is inflow. You can give selfishly (e.g. for recognition), but then your motive is personal gain, and therefore your direction is inflow and it's not "giving" in polarisation terms. You can take unselfishly (e.g. a charity accepting donations), but then your motive is to benefit others, and therefore your direction is outflow and it's not "taking" in polarisation terms.  |