Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post - Can someone please explain to me how polarization makes any sense???

Bitsy · 03-07-2007, 07:53 AM

Hello,

This topic has been extensively discussed in the "Steve Pavlina" section under the thread related to the respective blog. I tried posting something there too, but I don't think anyone noticed me, so I deleted it and presumed I had no idea what I was talking about

.

That is to say, I guess no one else agrees with and/or understands what I am going to write here and I have had no confirmation of it from anyone or even any response at all and if it were as simple as my explanation, I'm sure Steve would have explained it in simple terms instead, and also would not have associated certain intentions with a certain polarity. However, I am just trying to understand these things as best I can by myself. My understanding is further hindered by the fact that the way Steve understands and describes things causes him to use examples and references that I have no hope of understanding without going back to university and majoring in subjects that I suck in, and I've never even seen Star Wars.

From one example that Steve had written in the "Polarity" thread of an experience he had when trying to work with other people, I gathered that "polarization" is just simply a way to qualify your motive for an intention. Meaning, the motive for an intention you have can either be founded in fear or in love.

Due to the way polarity has been explained, lots of people here are now thinking that an intention in and of itself can have polarity and are asking questions like "does this intention have fear-based polarity".

1. For myself, I am sure, until the time that a knowing person takes the time to correct me, that what is really meant by polarity is your core motive for wanting and intending something, which has absolutely nothing to do with the intention itself. If you want a relationship, the intention itself does not have "polarity". Your reason for wanting it is the polarity. If you identify your motive, either love or fear (or a mixture thereof), for wanting something, you have identified your polarity for that intention.

2. Concerning choosing a fear-based polarity, realize that people are not consciously and deliberately choosing fear. Consider all the things you wrote about how terrible the world would be if people lived with a fear-based polarity and then look around you, turn on the news. People are living this way. They do not sit down and say "I want to live in fear and because of my fear I am going to fight and struggle to control everyone else." They just do it. To add to that, most people are not even aware of their true motive ("polarity") and may often think they are doing what they do out of love instead of fear, if they even think at all.

3. And I'm glad someone else finally brought up the "Overcoming Fear" podcast in light of "polarization" too, because I had asked a question about that in the post I deleted. My question was different than yours though. Think about this:

“As Buddha figured out, that sense of duality is really the source of all your fear and suffering. The more your life is rooted in the sense of separation from others, the more you believe in this objectified sense of reality, where people are separate and distinct objects from yourself, unlike in your dreams, where you compete with other people, where you’re vying for scarce resources, where when you succeed somebody else has to fail, the harder it will be for you to embrace non-duality, which is, in fact, the solution. I think this is what Jesus meant when he said that it’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. That’s a metaphorical way of saying that the more attached you are to your belief in duality, for example by thinking that money is something you have to hoard in order to feel secure, the more impossible it will be for you to transcend suffering.”

From this, and other things Steve has said and written, we can understand that a fear-based polarity occurs when one has a dualistic view of reality, which basically all people have by default. The preceding quote by Steve also clearly implies that those with a fear-based polarity (i.e. having fear for your motives) will always be suffering and they will not be able to enter "heaven".

When you put what Steve says about polarity in the light of this podcast, he really does appear to be condemning the fear-based polarity, or "darkworkers" ... (wherever that term came from). He himself said in the "True Nature of Reality" podcast basically exactly what you said: "Who would want to live in a reality like that??!"

4.why would having both love-based desires and fear-based desires be ineffective in manifesting intentions???

Well, I don't have anything to say about this, because I don't know, but I can feel it is true. There is some kind of contradiction between the two. At the very least, you know that if you are doing something, like writing a forum post, and your attention is split, maybe you are also aware of the work you should be doing that is due right now, you are not able to be fully effective in writing the post. Maybe it is something similar to that.

Which reminds me, now I really have to do my work...

03-07-2007, 07:53 AM	#2 (permalink)
Bitsy Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NYC Public Library Posts: 358	Hello, This topic has been extensively discussed in the "Steve Pavlina" section under the thread related to the respective blog. I tried posting something there too, but I don't think anyone noticed me, so I deleted it and presumed I had no idea what I was talking about . That is to say, I guess no one else agrees with and/or understands what I am going to write here and I have had no confirmation of it from anyone or even any response at all and if it were as simple as my explanation, I'm sure Steve would have explained it in simple terms instead, and also would not have associated certain intentions with a certain polarity. However, I am just trying to understand these things as best I can by myself. My understanding is further hindered by the fact that the way Steve understands and describes things causes him to use examples and references that I have no hope of understanding without going back to university and majoring in subjects that I suck in, and I've never even seen Star Wars. From one example that Steve had written in the "Polarity" thread of an experience he had when trying to work with other people, I gathered that "polarization" is just simply a way to qualify your motive for an intention. Meaning, the motive for an intention you have can either be founded in fear or in love. Due to the way polarity has been explained, lots of people here are now thinking that an intention in and of itself can have polarity and are asking questions like "does this intention have fear-based polarity". 1. For myself, I am sure, until the time that a knowing person takes the time to correct me, that what is really meant by polarity is your core motive for wanting and intending something, which has absolutely nothing to do with the intention itself. If you want a relationship, the intention itself does not have "polarity". Your reason for wanting it is the polarity. If you identify your motive, either love or fear (or a mixture thereof), for wanting something, you have identified your polarity for that intention. 2. Concerning choosing a fear-based polarity, realize that people are not consciously and deliberately choosing fear. Consider all the things you wrote about how terrible the world would be if people lived with a fear-based polarity and then look around you, turn on the news. People are living this way. They do not sit down and say "I want to live in fear and because of my fear I am going to fight and struggle to control everyone else." They just do it. To add to that, most people are not even aware of their true motive ("polarity") and may often think they are doing what they do out of love instead of fear, if they even think at all. 3. And I'm glad someone else finally brought up the "Overcoming Fear" podcast in light of "polarization" too, because I had asked a question about that in the post I deleted. My question was different than yours though. Think about this: “As Buddha figured out, that sense of duality is really the source of all your fear and suffering. The more your life is rooted in the sense of separation from others, the more you believe in this objectified sense of reality, where people are separate and distinct objects from yourself, unlike in your dreams, where you compete with other people, where you’re vying for scarce resources, where when you succeed somebody else has to fail, the harder it will be for you to embrace non-duality, which is, in fact, the solution. I think this is what Jesus meant when he said that it’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. That’s a metaphorical way of saying that the more attached you are to your belief in duality, for example by thinking that money is something you have to hoard in order to feel secure, the more impossible it will be for you to transcend suffering.” From this, and other things Steve has said and written, we can understand that a fear-based polarity occurs when one has a dualistic view of reality, which basically all people have by default. The preceding quote by Steve also clearly implies that those with a fear-based polarity (i.e. having fear for your motives) will always be suffering and they will not be able to enter "heaven". When you put what Steve says about polarity in the light of this podcast, he really does appear to be condemning the fear-based polarity, or "darkworkers" ... (wherever that term came from). He himself said in the "True Nature of Reality" podcast basically exactly what you said: "Who would want to live in a reality like that??!" 4.why would having both love-based desires and fear-based desires be ineffective in manifesting intentions??? Well, I don't have anything to say about this, because I don't know, but I can feel it is true. There is some kind of contradiction between the two. At the very least, you know that if you are doing something, like writing a forum post, and your attention is split, maybe you are also aware of the work you should be doing that is due right now, you are not able to be fully effective in writing the post. Maybe it is something similar to that. Which reminds me, now I really have to do my work...