Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post

fiar · 07-24-2007, 12:09 AM

This is my first post here, so indulge me perhaps.

I've been reading Steve's site voraciously for about a month, and today was the day I read about polarization and darkworker/lightworker. I disagree with the entire assessment on both points.

It's clear that the characterization of these two polarities seems like choosing whether to be Christlike versus being the Antichrist. I think the whole premise is wrong. Based on the descriptions of "darkworker, " that seems like it's a path of destruction, vanity, and other low-level consciousness qualities. The description of "lightworker" seems to be to strive for the highest good of all.

That's why it's wrong. If you can truly optimize through either path, and the behaviors reflected look the same, then one cannot be against the highest good while one is for it.

They are merely two sides of the same path.

I don't yet have terminology to properly label these two, so I will stick with the lightworker/darkworker labels.

A "darkworker" will be motivated by the desire to improve himself. In doing so, everyone benefits. If everyone does not benefit, then it is not high consciousness being achieved. If there is retribution or any price to pay for self-improvement, then the self has not improved. To truly self-optimize, one must consider the highest good as well.

A "lightworker" will be motivated by the desire to serve others. In order to best serve others, she needs to also optimize herself. If she does not optimize herself, she cannot BEST serve others. She can serve others, but not to the maximum potential.

Thus, I see the idea of light versus dark flawed. Service of self and service of others are mutually enhancing and congruent.

I see polarization as a choice of which will be the motivating factor. If you look and say, "I want to be the best that I can be. I know that if I do that, it will be for the highest good" (especially if you consider subjective reality). If you look and say, "I want to serve the highest good. I know to do that I must be the best I can be" (especially if you consider subjective reality).

So, the only difference between the two "polarizations" is which lights the fire. I know when I consider the two options, I say, "I can really get motivated to be the best I can be." By that definition, I am a "darkworker," until I figure out a better set of terminology.

Evil people are NOT "darkworkers," they are low consciousness beings. Conversely, being a good person does NOT make you a "lightworker." "Darkworker" is not fear based. It is "self motivates me." "Lightworker" is not love based. It is "service motivates me."

If it is not for the highest good, it is NOT high consciousness.

07-24-2007, 12:09 AM	#39 (permalink)
fiar Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 24	I disagree with the darkworker/lightworker premise This is my first post here, so indulge me perhaps. I've been reading Steve's site voraciously for about a month, and today was the day I read about polarization and darkworker/lightworker. I disagree with the entire assessment on both points. It's clear that the characterization of these two polarities seems like choosing whether to be Christlike versus being the Antichrist. I think the whole premise is wrong. Based on the descriptions of "darkworker, " that seems like it's a path of destruction, vanity, and other low-level consciousness qualities. The description of "lightworker" seems to be to strive for the highest good of all. That's why it's wrong. If you can truly optimize through either path, and the behaviors reflected look the same, then one cannot be against the highest good while one is for it. They are merely two sides of the same path. I don't yet have terminology to properly label these two, so I will stick with the lightworker/darkworker labels. A "darkworker" will be motivated by the desire to improve himself. In doing so, everyone benefits. If everyone does not benefit, then it is not high consciousness being achieved. If there is retribution or any price to pay for self-improvement, then the self has not improved. To truly self-optimize, one must consider the highest good as well. A "lightworker" will be motivated by the desire to serve others. In order to best serve others, she needs to also optimize herself. If she does not optimize herself, she cannot BEST serve others. She can serve others, but not to the maximum potential. Thus, I see the idea of light versus dark flawed. Service of self and service of others are mutually enhancing and congruent. I see polarization as a choice of which will be the motivating factor. If you look and say, "I want to be the best that I can be. I know that if I do that, it will be for the highest good" (especially if you consider subjective reality). If you look and say, "I want to serve the highest good. I know to do that I must be the best I can be" (especially if you consider subjective reality). So, the only difference between the two "polarizations" is which lights the fire. I know when I consider the two options, I say, "I can really get motivated to be the best I can be." By that definition, I am a "darkworker," until I figure out a better set of terminology. Evil people are NOT "darkworkers," they are low consciousness beings. Conversely, being a good person does NOT make you a "lightworker." "Darkworker" is not fear based. It is "self motivates me." "Lightworker" is not love based. It is "service motivates me." If it is not for the highest good, it is NOT high consciousness.