Everyone is a Darkworkers

[Rivelli]

Fundamentally, people do whatever makes them happy. That can include "dedicating your life to the greater good" which seems to be the definition of being a Lightworker. The definition of being a Darkworker is "dedicating your life to serving yourself" which I believe is synonymous with doing whatever makes you happy.

Since its really about whatever makes you happy, even the people that dedicate themselves to the greater good are Darkworkers as well. Its how our brains work, people do whatever makes them happy, so I believe it is incorrect to call certain people that have certain kinds of selfishness Lightworkers. It can indeed be said that certain kinds of selfishness is better for society than others but it is still selfishness.

When I first introduced myself to the forum, I said I was a Darkworker. That was a mistake because it was pointless to mention it as everyone else is that as well. Its like I said I require oxygen to survive. When I first joined the forum, I was all about Information Security, since then, I got into straight Software Engineering. The further and deeper I go, I have to keep getting into harder stuff to keep me interested, I need that intellectual challenge. I am currently mastering my understanding of Software Engineering, the Linux Kernel, Compiler Design, A.I. and going to make a career out of that for the next few years. After a few years, the challenge will be gone and I have to move to a harder area. I'll get into Theoretical Physics / QM and combine that knowledge along with Computer Science into Quantum Computing as well as other areas of Theoretical Physics / Mathematics including attempting to solve unsolved problems.

Doing such things can indeed be interpreted as "dedicating my life to the greater good." Make no mistake though, I do it because it makes me happy, it gives me a natural high. That makes me a Darkworker. I believe it is the same with everyone else, they do what makes them happy, even if it can be viewed as selflessness, its not. Everyone is a Darkworker.

EDit: Dammit, I can't edit the topic name. Darkworker wasn't supposed to be plural!

[pyrogen]

Yep

I decided to start calling myself a Darkworker because having called myself a Lightworker in the past was an ego trap. Embracing my ego has given me a more effective way to deal with it. I'm a better, more honest person.

[Angela Leeds]

Originally Posted by Rivelli

Fundamentally, people do whatever makes them happy. That can include "dedicating your life to the greater good" which seems to be the definition of being a Lightworker. The definition of being a Darkworker is "dedicating your life to serving yourself" which I believe is synonymous with doing whatever makes you happy.

So...your happiness is in some way not for the greater good?

[Trezker]

In my view, darkworkers are shortsighted while lightworkers see the big picture.

Darkworkers need to constantly keep their relations under control, as soon as they loose contact with someone, they loose control over that person and have to start over from scratch in building up a relation again. Luckily for the darkworker, building a new relation is a quick process, it's easy to replace people.

A lightworker builds relations that last a lifetime. But it takes a long time to build a new relation to that point. But you can afford to loose contact with someone for decade or two and when you meet again, your whole relationship is still intact and strong.

However, both paths are equally selfish and require the same amount of energy.

[Rivelli]

Originally Posted by Angela Leeds

So...your happiness is in some way not for the greater good?

What makes me happy is intellectual challenges, Programming, Computer Science, Mathematics, Physics. These areas make me so happy that I obsessively learn and practice in those areas all day, every day, for the most part. Doing so will eventually lead to significant contributions for the greater good. I didn't do it for the greater good though, I did it because I enjoyed doing it.

I believe it is the same with others, even if they seem to be selfless. Did you notice that many of those people that do selfless things tend to preach to others that they should do similar things / talk about how good it makes them feel, etc?

People don't do things for others unless it makes them happy. Remember that old saying "To give is to receive." That is saying to give / be selfless make one receive happiness. Selfless acts are an investment for happiness. If people didn't get their return, selfless acts would cease. I may eventually significantly contribute to the greater good but it certainly wasn't for the greater good. My contribution would be the sum of my skill derived from a subject that made me and kept me happy. It wasn't done for the greater good.

[Angela Leeds]

Originally Posted by Rivelli

People don't do things for others unless it makes them happy.

If that's true, then perhaps lightworker & darkworker as you've defined them doesn't really make sense....

[SimonaRich]

I don't understand why people label themselves this way.

Labels are only required for your egos to categorise things to distinguish which ones you like and which ones you dislike.

Everyone is doing everything for the hope of those activities making them happy (or leading to happiness). Selfish or not, this is how it is.

[Xanafax]

Living for ones self - Darkworking - is ultimately the highest moral ideal.

One can only ever hope to help oneself. An attempt to help others is futile in that ultimately people are stupid. Individuals are intelligent, but get them together and you have a herd of sheep who would rather listen to the media than you.

Instead of thinking we are all one big happy family with just a few wayward strays - stop deluding yourself - a more appropriate model of thought is that of the noble individual. Solitary Man. Life is it's own reason, there is no universal "meaning" to help and support each other. Help others by focussing on yourself, not on others. Live for your own gain in a rational way and believe me, the world will fall into place for you.

When I look at people like Richard Branson, I don't see a heartless fat-cat out for himself. I see a proud, rightfully selfish individual achieving his peak and it inspires me to be better. In his act of selfishness he has inadvertently inspired me and many others to be better.

When I see the "Lightworkers", spouting nonsense about loving your neighbour, giving to the poor, helping the needy I feel almost sick because he is most deplorable in my opinion. Choosing to help others before yourself is disrespectful. Charity is a lie. Altruism is a creeping hell.

It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master. - Ayn Rand

[aphorist]

xanafax: Morals are ego. There is no such thing as universal morality, it changes with culture and individuals, therefore we can't really talk about morality if we want to understand eachother.

There is a big difference between helping yourself and helping yourself at the cost of everyone else. I personally have no problem with enlightened apathy, but if you polarized to darkworking you're effectively using people with no concern for the harm you're creating.. If you polarize with lightworking, you're effectively using yourself with no concern for the harm your creating.

This is why this dark/lightworker model has very little relevance in anything. Even when Steve talks about it, he basically says that anyone knowing anything needs to eventually come to the realization that there is a balance, but until you reach that point, a focused goal is good to have.

And you can't possibly believe that you are the only person worth anything to you in this world. Even from your self-serving standpoint, there are so many people who mean something to you and will mean something to you in the future. I think that lacking respect for those people is a really angry/sad prospect, but to each his own, eh?

[pyrogen]

When I think 'Darkworker' I think Ayn Rand, not Genghis Khan, Stalin or Adolph Hitler (who was a misguided dude trying to be a LIGHTWORKER!).

One could even argue that the Buddha - in the context of his times - was a Darkworker.

[Xanafax]

aphorist you obviously do not understand what I am talking about.

Rational self interest is logically ideal. It's not about opinion. Or Ego. It's just a fact. Rationality keeps you alive longer, keeps you happier for longer, keeps you sane longer.

Respect for other people's ability to possibly help me is ridiculous. Certainly it makes more sense to respect the man who has helped you. As opposed to the potential of that man to help me.

I believe that my happiness is the single most important thing in this world. My happiness is achieved when I succeed. When I meet my goals and my needs.

I don't find as much happiness in seeing others meet these needs as when I meet mine. But I certainly feel a great rush when I see someone who works hard succeed and earn what they rightly deserve. That to me is the most wonderful goal. To achieve ones own unbridled happiness. To earn what one deserves through hard work and effort. Not hand outs or charity.

[aphorist]

Please don't read what I wrote as an attack, it's hard to chat over forums because everything becomes a disagreement. I was making a point that the light/darkworking model doesn't work in most cases.

But let's pull back for a second. What is happiness to you? It seems that you equate happiness with success. Is success really important though? When you're no longer alive, will the things you've done be important or who you were as a person be important? See, it's ego that says "my accomplishments are who I am." In actuality, your accomplishments can shape how you view yourself, but they don't make you a better/worse person.

"Happiness" is also something that's so subjective that it's hard to prove it to be a value. I don't think that you're doing what makes you happy, but, rather, what you enjoy. It's not that trying hard and succeeding makes you happy, but that, mostly because of social conditioning, you enjoy working hard for a goal. Enjoyment is far from a logical, rational goal.


"Rational self-interest" could be understood with the goal of inner happiness, but enjoyment isn't a goal at all. Here's an example: If I enjoy being super depressed, should I try to be depressed all the time? In this instance, I'm enjoying something but I'm not happy.

If none of this is making sense (sorry), what I'm trying to get at is that happiness belongs to yourself, but enjoyment belongs to your ego. And ego boosting will not bring you happiness, in fact, boosting your ego takes away from the energy that could be spend making you happy.

[aphorist]

Originally Posted by pyrogen

When I think 'Darkworker' I think Ayn Rand, not Genghis Khan, Stalin or Adolph Hitler (who was a misguided dude trying to be a LIGHTWORKER!).

One could even argue that the Buddha - in the context of his times - was a Darkworker.

This is why we're having so many problems in this thread. Darkworking isn't Ayn Rand's Objectivist standpoint. Even look at Xanafax's quote, Roark respects the freedom of everyman. A darkworker doesn't respect anyone but himself. Polarizing to darkworking is truly an unenlightened standpoint.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

Instead of thinking we are all one big happy family with just a few wayward strays - stop deluding yourself - a more appropriate model of thought is that of the noble individual. Solitary Man. Life is it's own reason, there is no universal "meaning" to help and support each other. Help others by focussing on yourself, not on others. Live for your own gain in a rational way and believe me, the world will fall into place for you.

True, however, an individualized path can still be a creative, loving one.

Yet I must tell you that there is hardly any spiritual movement on this planet that has understood the reality of the path to Christhood, the reality that the path to Christhood is not a mechanical process. It is indeed a creative process, my beloved. Which is why you cannot give a standard definition of how all people should walk that path. It is indeed an individual path, for you have – each one individually – accepted certain illusions that have caused you to shut off your creativity, to shut off the flow of God's light and love through your being. And therefore, you must individually come to see that these are illusions—and thereby let them go, surrender them, decide to replace them with the truth of Christ.

ARJBookstore. Course in Christhood

[Xanafax]

Please don't read what I wrote as an attack, it's hard to chat over forums because everything becomes a disagreement. I was making a point that the light/darkworking model doesn't work in most cases.

I wasn't considering it an attack. I was just replying to what I interpreted your post as saying.

But let's pull back for a second. What is happiness to you? It seems that you equate happiness with success. Is success really important though? When you're no longer alive, will the things you've done be important or who you were as a person be important? See, it's ego that says "my accomplishments are who I am." In actuality, your accomplishments can shape how you view yourself, but they don't make you a better/worse person.

I believe that there isn't an afterlife, and if there is, what difference does it make because it cannot be proved. Better/worse is defined by an internal frame of reference. So if achieving success makes me feel better, then I am a better person for it. Now who is talking about universal morals?

"Happiness" is also something that's so subjective that it's hard to prove it to be a value. I don't think that you're doing what makes you happy, but, rather, what you enjoy. It's not that trying hard and succeeding makes you happy, but that, mostly because of social conditioning, you enjoy working hard for a goal. Enjoyment is far from a logical, rational goal.

Happiness is brought about when you succeed at what you set out to do. Or it is the enjoyment of producing that which you set out to do. Equal enjoyment can be wrought from building a computer as it can from firing it up for the first time.

"Rational self-interest" could be understood with the goal of inner happiness, but enjoyment isn't a goal at all. Here's an example: If I enjoy being super depressed, should I try to be depressed all the time? In this instance, I'm enjoying something but I'm not happy.

Being constantly depressed isn't rational. So your example is redundant in this case.

If none of this is making sense (sorry), what I'm trying to get at is that happiness belongs to yourself, but enjoyment belongs to your ego. And ego boosting will not bring you happiness, in fact, boosting your ego takes away from the energy that could be spend making you happy.

Ego is a part of myself. In fact, it IS myself.

[aphorist]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

Ego is a part of myself. In fact, it IS myself.

That's where we disagree then. I think ego is a superfluous, detrimental thing. I think it's separate from who you really are. It is fun to self-indulge, but it is also far removed from reality.

But neither of us is right, it's just two different ways to view things. I'm currently trying to figure out, from as objective a stance as I can, what my role is here, and you've figured out how to define your role from a subjective stance.

[Xanafax]

Why do you have such a negative view of the ego?

[aphorist]

it's hard for me to explain quickly, but, to me, ego is the facade that we put up. It's not real, honest, or helpful. It's most detrimental not because it fakes others out, but because it fakes ourselves out. Ego is completely created by external influences, so it's not of the self. And ego is what then controls most of what we do/how we interact with eachother.

This means that we're all being controlled by exernal influences and that ourselves have no will. It's not that this is wrong, but it does seem to degrade our experiences and knowledge. Yes, I can feel like I control what I'm doing, but I really don't if I'm identifying with my ego which was created through external interaction.

[magi13]

Anyone can be a darkworker or lightworker, depending on the nature or the circumstance of the situation. It depends on the choice they make on that issue at that critical or turning point.

The classification of being either of the two is how the world sees a certain person or how the person see's himself.

In this post all I can say is that their is no absolutes.

[Jthorn]

Like I 've said elsewhere, darkworking and lightworking could be described as different levels of maturity and in fact, there's more shades than 2. And in different aspects of your life, you could be at different maturity levels.
Actually, Steve had a good article on the levels of conciousness, which is a pretty simlar concept.
I have to disagree that "lightworkers" help others it for a natural high, although it's hard to understand this when you still divide the world into "me and the rest".

[st33med]

Lightworkers and darkworkers are both aiming for the same thing: happiness.

Remember Steve said both paths end up at the same point: enlightenment. Some people find focusing on self for happiness. Some people find helping others leads to happiness.

If we did not focus on happiness, then what is our purpose? Be emo and depressed? No. Happiness is the goal. We just need to find our way to constant happiness.

Buddha's are not darkworkers. They help others. They are happy by helping others. Do not get ego mixed with being a darkworker, because ego is a tool to enjoy life. Being lead by ego, in fact, limits ourselves to being fear-based that are easily manipulated by the news.

[st33med]

Originally Posted by aphorist

Polarizing to darkworking is truly an unenlightened standpoint.

To you, maybe, but to the darkworker, he finds indulging himself in others pain for him enlightening.

[magi13]

Originally Posted by st33med

To you, maybe, but to the darkworker, he finds indulging himself in others pain for him enlightening.

For the sake of the argument.

A good example of this is a sadist.

A masochist would want to be hit by the sadist, that's his pleasure.

The sadist will refrain from hitting the masochist, by doing so, he frustrates the masochist. Therefore enjoying the other's frustration/pain.

[Parthon]

Originally Posted by Rivelli

Fundamentally, people do whatever makes them happy. That can include "dedicating your life to the greater good" which seems to be the definition of being a Lightworker. The definition of being a Darkworker is "dedicating your life to serving yourself" which I believe is synonymous with doing whatever makes you happy.

Since its really about whatever makes you happy, even the people that dedicate themselves to the greater good are Darkworkers as well. Its how our brains work, people do whatever makes them happy, so I believe it is incorrect to call certain people that have certain kinds of selfishness Lightworkers. It can indeed be said that certain kinds of selfishness is better for society than others but it is still selfishness.

--blah blah blah--

You do create three statements here that are opinions, not facts.

1. People are defined by their brains and/or ego
2. People are after maximum personal happiness
3. Everything a person does is for selfish reasons

Your whole premise that lightworkers are darkworkers doesn't even make sense to me actually, because those three statements are fundamentally true in my world. Yes, a majority of people identified with their ego do what's best for maximum happiness. Strangely enough, a majority of people aren't happy. So if we are all striving for personal happiness, why are we so unhappy. You have mentioned that you are happy when you are studying and learning, or when you achieve something. What about the rest of the time? Your life isn't taken up wholey by learning and accomplishments. Are you really trying to maximise your personal happiness, because having gaps in happiness doesn't sound like maximisation.

On top of that, I see the ego as just the part of me that defines my avatar, the part that creates seperation in order to give focus. It's make a very very poor master, because it's so small minded and incredibly petty. It's so damn selfish that it can't see the bigger picture. It's shockingly myopic. I still love it though, it enables me to say "I am human, and I stand for humanity.", and that is a great gift.

Given that, I am humanity, I am the world. I'm not this Eric person, there's a whole world out there, and I don't see why I'm not that world. I'm not helping others for a small ego gain. I'm using the greatest tool I have in order to help all of us. This doesn't make me happy in the slightest, and I certainly don't do it out of any personal gain. This isn't even selfless, because that defines a limiting self.

I guess if you were to go far enough, you could say my self is the whole. So while working on improving the whole, I really am being selfish, selfish for the whole when self is the whole. Although at that level, there's no such thing as darkworker/lightworker.

[Trezker]

Someone said that helping others before helping yourself is a bad thing. This I completely agree with, and so does all real lightworkers.

Those who choose to help others before themselves suffer from lightworkers syndrome. Not only do they live miserable poor lives but they also are not worth much to anyone else.

Both darkworkers and lightworkers must take care of themselves first. The difference doesn't arise until after your own needs are met.

[Miia]

Doing such things can indeed be interpreted as "dedicating my life to the greater good." Make no mistake though, I do it because it makes me happy, it gives me a natural high. That makes me a Darkworker. I believe it is the same with everyone else, they do what makes them happy, even if it can be viewed as selflessness, its not. Everyone is a Darkworker.

I´ve been thinking about this lately a lot.
Yes and no. Mostly, yes, people do things because they get satisfaction out of it ... may it be financial, emotional or whatever. And there`s nothing wrong with that. Even if the motives are triggered by the ego, the outcome of such actions can still be very beneficial to others. Help yourself and you are helping others around you... It only gets ugly for me when people aren`t honest with themselves and others about these motives.
I understand that mentally, but emotional it`s hard to cope with...
It just doesn`t sound right: I do charity because it gives me a sense of rightness, a sense that I am a good, cool person??? (and no I am not involved with charity ... have wanted to be many times, but backed down because I wasn`t sure WHY I wanted it ).

Charity left aside, I think that there are some truly selfless actions though. Critical, temporary, sudden situations like ... when you see a kid walking on ice and suddenly the ice breaks, and he`s yelling : help, help or whatever, I`m sure most of us would run to rescue him just because he`s in trouble and asking for help. We wouldn`t have the time to think about why we are doing it or how good we will feel when it`s over

[Chris_1977]

Originally Posted by Rivelli

Doing such things can indeed be interpreted as "dedicating my life to the greater good." Make no mistake though, I do it because it makes me happy, it gives me a natural high. That makes me a Darkworker.

I think you are unpolarized. A lightworker could do the things you described for being creative (which is a lightworking purpose) or a darkworker could do it to gain power (which is a darkworking purpose). "It makes me happy" can still go both ways, I think. Doing things that make you happy will sometimes make you do things that have outflowing energy and sometimes inflowing energy. So, that is both dark and light, hence unpolarized. Or am I missing something?

[aphorist]

Originally Posted by Miia

Charity left aside, I think that there are some truly selfless actions though. Critical, temporary, sudden situations like ... when you see a kid walking on ice and suddenly the ice breaks, and he`s yelling : help, help or whatever, I`m sure most of us would run to rescue him just because he`s in trouble and asking for help. We wouldn`t have the time to think about why we are doing it or how good we will feel when it`s over

This is a great example to determine if you're a truly polarized darkworker. If you would just walk by the drowning kid and continue on your way, you are polarized. There's no need for you to expend energy and risk your own life to save the kid, right?

[Parthon]

But what if saving the kid you can blackmail a reward out of someone.
Or what if by saving the kid you'll feel happier for a second because you were better than him?
Or what if by saving the kid you can steal his lunch money?

Honestly, I think everyone arguing about lightworker/darkworker is just too scared to come play in the real world. They don't actually have the power to make a difference, so they just pretend they do.

[pyrogen]

What I'm almost willing to believe is that Steve is using some kind of crazy-wisdom/Coyote/trickster energy on us and is sitting back watching us all go nuts over the whole lightworker/darkworker conundrum. Especially since he's long since realized that we all follow everything he says like a bunch of lemmings and succumb to the very groupthink he's warned about.