Greyworker

[impaul99]

Ok, I think the reason I'm confused by all this polarization stuff is because I think there is a third option besides Lightworker and Darkworker which would be a Greyworker which is what I think I am.

Here's how I would define myself as a Greyworker in terms of my beliefs and such:

- I offer love to the people around me, and I enjoy receiving love back. I do not focus strictly on offering love or receiving love, I just do both at all times of the day naturally

- I provide value for any work I do and I accept payment for it. Sometimes I provide value first and receive payment after, and other times I ask for payment first and provide value after.

- Some of my goals aim at helping the world and thus GIVING to the world, while others aim at GETTING the things I want from the world which make me fell happy and fulfilled. I do not hoarde by excessively focusing on GETTING, GETTING, GETTING, nor do I excessively GIVE, GIVE, GIVE. Instead, I focus on increasing the flow of GIVING, GETTING, GIVING, GETTING.

- I do not judge every thought or action I take as either FEAR driven or LOVE driven. I simply try to act naturally knowing and accepting that in certain areas of my life I am motivated mostly by love energy, while in others I may still be motivated by fear energy. For example, eating healthy meals might be considered FEAR driven, as I may choose to elect eating healthy in FEAR that I may develop cancer or other diseases if I eat unhealthy foods. I am aware that at some point, a truly enlightened individual may transcend such a limitation and may be able to eat anything and still be totally perfectly healthy, but I am not at that stage yet so in that area I may still eat healthy due to fear motivation. In other areas of my life I may be love motivated where I help people with little attention paid to what I "Get" out of it. I simply help without worry about what's in it for me.

- I do not try to polarize myself in one direction, for example going from 0 to +1 to +5 to +10 to +50 etc. I instead focus on increasing the magnitude of the energy that naturally cycles within me even if the progress may look more like 0, +1/0, +5/-1, +10/-2, +50/-6, +100/-9 etc. Thus, even though the +10/-2 gives me a net effect of +8 I feel I can get there faster than if I tried to completely only go in the positive direction.

Translated into practical terms what this means is that as I go towards +50 in the positive direction helping the world with lots of things, I may also payse for a second to receive the money now inflowing to me naturally as automatic payment and I may even go out and buy myself a new toy, like an XBOX 360 or a new car or something, which could technically (depending how u look at it) be a negative energy, hence the +50 being balanced by the -6 (getting and playing XBOX as an example). But the net effect is now that I'm at +44 (+50-6 = +44), and after a short break I get bored of XBOX and go back to moving forward and moving towards +100 in terms of giving and when I get there I see more things coming to me as "rewards" so I pause to accept them and have some fun. Some of the fun may be what Steve would consider "Darkworker" material, so that sets me back -9 lets say so now I'm at +100/-9 or a net effect of +92.

So, having described this as what I would call a Greyworker, I wonder if others see things this way as well? To me, it just intuitively feels like trying to completely polarize in one direction isn't healthy and it might be counter-productive. I think that for me it's easier to try to do both lightworker and darkworker stuff, or more accurately to just go out there and DO what my intuition tells me to do without regard whether it's labeled as DARKWORKER or LIGHTWORKER. In the end I think if you just DO what feels right and natural to you, you'll automatically polarize in your natural direction even if the path involves a little bit of DARK with the LIGHT or a little bit of LIGHT with the DARK.

Living life as a greyworker I dont' have to worry about what I do as long as it intuitively feels right. For example, if I get excited about reading a series of books I might spend 3 weeks reading these books (INPUT). If I then feel excited to write some articles on my blog, I'll do that (OUTPUT). If I then feel like buying my wife flowers I'll do that (OUTPUT OF LOVE), but then I might call her from work and ask if she'd be willing to prepare my favorite meal for me (INPUT). In this way, I just act naturally, and naturally gravitate towards my chosen direction even if it's not a pure LIGHT or DARK path, but rather a GREY path somewhere in between.

What do you guys think?

[Dan.Linehan]

I think light and darkworking are almost the same thing. Differences in conduct don't really arise in practice. If you read my post here, you'll see some of what I mean.

Let's look at my friend 5 years in the future. At that point he'll be running a successful company. He'll have opportunities to legally crush some of his competitors. A lightworker, with a perspective of abundance, would think that there is plenty of work for everyone, and would just keep providing service. My friend, as a darkworker, would also want to stay on good terms with the competition because he would never know when he might need something from them in the future.

Microsoft (dark) and google (light) generally just buy out their competition. With the money my friend will have, he'll have the option to do this as well.

As a darkworker, he may attempt to intimidate or scare the competition into selling at a lower price through negotiation, or by skewing facts. A lightworker would also try to get the best deal they could on an acquisition, citing charity in the negotiations; getting the best deal grants a lightworker more capital to provide future services.

In our society growing and evolving a business is much more about dedication and persistance than motives.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

I think light and darkworking are almost the same thing. Differences in conduct don't really arise in practice. If you read my post here, you'll see some of what I mean.

Let's look at my friend 5 years in the future. At that point he'll be running a successful company. He'll have opportunities to legally crush some of his competitors. A lightworker, with a perspective of abundance, would think that there is plenty of work for everyone, and would just keep providing service. My friend, as a darkworker, would also want to stay on good terms with the competition because he would never know when he might need something from them in the future.

Microsoft (dark) and google (light) generally just buy out their competition. With the money my friend will have, he'll have the option to do this as well.

As a darkworker, he may attempt to intimidate or scare the competition into selling at a lower price through negotiation, or by skewing facts. A lightworker would also try to get the best deal they could on an acquisition, citing charity in the negotiations; getting the best deal grants a lightworker more capital to provide future services.

In our society growing and evolving a business is much more about dedication and persistance than motives.

I think this is a little bit pie-in-the-sky thinking.

Darkworkers in power will use manipulation, propaganda, and panic inducing techniques to control others. Lightworkers will not try to control others.

Darkworkers will exploit informational advantages they have over others to increase their own power. Lightworkers will refuse to do this unless it's for the greater good.

Darkworkers will become military and political leaders and set up dictatorships for which they are the Emporer. They will then set out to conquer and subjugate more and more people to increase their own personal power and wealth. They will use their position to beguile, tempt, theaten and coerce those around them into doing their bidding. Darkworkers, when conquering a country, will use propaganda, deceit, terror, and torture to subjugate and pacify the populace. They will brutually crush opposition - a quick and secretive death to all who oppose their rule. No remorse will be given, mercy is only weakness.

Julius Caesar was a greyworker. He conquered Gaul, became the dictator of Rome. But he had mercy. He granted clemency to his opponents and attempted to befriend them and work in a coalition with them. His closest friend Brutus aided in his murder.

Octavian Caesar was a darkworker. When he took over Rome, all opponents that threatened him were mercilessly done away with. This made him Emporer for life. He became one of only a handful of the most powerful and successful people in all of human history.

The most successful individuals in history with the maximal personal power and material wealth were all brutal murderes. Alexander the Great, Augustus Caesar, Genghis Khan.

The most successful lightworkers in history with the maximal positive effect on humanity were not these people. Instead they were paupers and pacifists. Jesus, Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Junior.

There is a clear difference in effect between lightworkers and darkworkers. In a capitalist society, their effect can look very similary since the laws of our society are set up to allow people to be highly polarized darkworkers without significantly harming others. But there is a certain level of power where laws cease to apply, and here you will find darkworkers commiting the most atrocious infringements on the lives of other humans.

Genghis Khan was not a stupid man, and he was not a cruel man. He was a balanced and extremely powerful darkworker. He killed people not for fun but because it was the best thing to do for himself. He conquered for himself. He did help the world a lot - as a good darkworker will end up doing. But helping the world wasn't his intention, and on his path he murdered many many people.

In the end Genghis Khan died comfortable, at home, of old age. Surrounded by family and friends who loved him and celebrated his life. He was idolized by all until a few hundred years later when Western authorities started using his fame to induce fear in their population. (Which is why today we condemn Genghis Khan while praising Alexander the Great or Augustus.)

Anyway I think it's very naieve to say there is no difference between the actions or behaviour of the two polarities. There certainly is - and the difference is that when a highly polarized darkworker can get away scot-free with an "immoral" act he will take full advantage of the opportunity.

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by yossarian

But there is a certain level of power where laws cease to apply, and here you will find darkworkers commiting the most atrocious infringements on the lives of other humans.

Originally Posted by yossarian

Anyway I think it's very naieve to say there is no difference between the actions or behaviour of the two polarities. There certainly is - and the difference is that when a highly polarized darkworker can get away scot-free with an "immoral" act he will take full advantage of the opportunity.

We agree that darkworkers would only do something bad if they could get away with it scot-free. The thing is, with current technology you would have to be niave to think that you can get away with anything scot-free. Fear-mongering isn't exactly effective for long. An adept darkworker cares deeply about his reputation for money making reasons. There can't really be any skeletons in the closet.

My friend is going to be making close 500k a year working for himself. You can multiply that by ten once he has a few employees. Do you really think he's dumb enough to risk his income by doing something immoral?

Maybe you think that he would use fear and control tactics on his employees, but you'd be wrong. Happy employees mean higher production, which means more money for him. That's just good management.

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

My friend is going to be making close 500k a year working for himself. You can multiply that by ten once he has a few employees. Do you really think he's dumb enough to risk his income by doing something immoral?

Maybe you think that he would use fear and control tactics on his employees, but you'd be wrong. Happy employees means higher production, which means more money for him. That's just good management.

Well said! Darkworkers don't need to be murdering/torturing/enslaving people to be very successful in the modern age.

Originally Posted by yossarian

Octavian Caesar was a darkworker. When he took over Rome, all opponents that threatened him were mercilessly done away with. This made him Emporer for life. He became one of only a handful of the most powerful and successful people in all of human history.

The most successful individuals in history with the maximal personal power and material wealth were all brutal murderes. Alexander the Great, Augustus Caesar, Genghis Khan.

Back in the days when darkworkers did this it was considered perfectly normal. Don't forget that in the days of ancient Rome, it was expected that a conquering army would kill and enslave lots of people in a besieged city. And it was a very smart thing to kill any people that could betray you when you came to power. In ancient times, darkworker actions wouldn't be considered immoral or unethical. Those actions were necessary not only for success but even for mere survival! It was simply the smartest thing to do given the circumstances. Be happy that you're alive today, when you can criticize people for what they did 2,000 years ago from the safety and comfort of your living room.

Originally Posted by yossarian

Anyway I think it's very naieve to say there is no difference between the actions or behaviour of the two polarities. There certainly is - and the difference is that when a highly polarized darkworker can get away scot-free with an "immoral" act he will take full advantage of the opportunity.

They'll do something "bad" if they can get away with it only if it's something that helps them achieve their goals. Being a darkworker doesn't mean doing evil things just because you can get away with them. If it serves no purpose it's not worth doing. Ultimately however, doing bad things in modern society will lead to no good as Dan said. It's virtually impossible to get away with illegal things today, much more so than it was 30 years ago when Richard Nixon tried to do it. A smart darkworker won't take such risks.

[nownow]

@impaul99

I feel as you do. I think focusing on Polarities is a mistake. The motivation is the same for people in either polarity: what will it take to maximize my personal happiness. People give because it makes them feel good and they take because it makes them feel good. If you are doing something for the benefit of others you are just as much doing it for yourself. If I offer my life for my country or religion I must have a belief that it is my duty to do this and thus to carry it out will make me feel good about myself.... lightworker for my country or religion a darkworker for the life I have taken and their family, its just a matter of perspective. The most balanced people give and take. When your balanced it is not about yourself, its just about the moment.

[Glass Joe]

Yeah, if I had to choose, I'd be a greyworker too.

Now that I think about it, being a greyworker is a lot like the Buddhist "Middle Way".

And to take the Star Wars analogy further, here's some info on the Grey Jedi I posted a while back:

Grey Jedi

One cool thing about being a greyworker is that you blend in with the crowd. Since you don't pick sides, you are free to associate with any side.

Also, to outside observers, whether the observer is polarized or not, you just look like a powerless commoner. You are neither a potential enemy to try to defeat, nor a potential ally to try to recruit. Darkworkers feel no *need* to take anything from you, and Lightworkers feel no *need* to give anything to you. Though you are free to *help* either side - by giving to Darkworkers and receiving from Lightworkers - however the situation, or your intuition, dictates.

Even though she may look like an un-polarized commoner, a "Grey" isn't powerless. She has just as much potential power as a Jedi proper or a Sith. She just doesn't feel the need to polarize one way or the other.

Bottom line, it's your subjective reality. If polarization is helpful, great. And I can see how polarization can be helpful with focus and orientation. (Like a lighthouse) But if it becomes restrictive, why should the polarization requirement exist in your reality?

[Bruce Achterberg]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

I think light and darkworking are almost the same thing. Differences in conduct don't really arise in practice. If you read my post here, you'll see some of what I mean.

Let's look at my friend 5 years in the future. At that point he'll be running a successful company. He'll have opportunities to legally crush some of his competitors. A lightworker, with a perspective of abundance, would think that there is plenty of work for everyone, and would just keep providing service. My friend, as a darkworker, would also want to stay on good terms with the competition because he would never know when he might need something from them in the future.

Microsoft (dark) and google (light) generally just buy out their competition. With the money my friend will have, he'll have the option to do this as well.

As a darkworker, he may attempt to intimidate or scare the competition into selling at a lower price through negotiation, or by skewing facts. A lightworker would also try to get the best deal they could on an acquisition, citing charity in the negotiations; getting the best deal grants a lightworker more capital to provide future services.

In our society growing and evolving a business is much more about dedication and persistance than motives.

Originally Posted by yossarian

Darkworkers in power will use manipulation, propaganda, and panic inducing techniques to control others. Lightworkers will not try to control others.

Darkworkers will exploit informational advantages they have over others to increase their own power. Lightworkers will refuse to do this unless it's for the greater good.

Darkworkers will become military and political leaders and set up dictatorships for which they are the Emporer. They will then set out to conquer and subjugate more and more people to increase their own personal power and wealth. They will use their position to beguile, tempt, theaten and coerce those around them into doing their bidding. Darkworkers, when conquering a country, will use propaganda, deceit, terror, and torture to subjugate and pacify the populace. They will brutually crush opposition - a quick and secretive death to all who oppose their rule. No remorse will be given, mercy is only weakness.

Good news: I think you're both right. Really, when you come down to it, it’s all a matter of style/preference/strengths and weaknesses as well as risk/reward.

Consider this:

A darkworker can go the "ultimate power route" (as yossarian suggests), but that potentially has a high risk/reward. There is a very relevant quote from the anime series Berserk that I’m going to paraphrase to emphasise my point:

“The brighter that one shines, the darker the shadows around him grow.”

In other words, you can choose to exploit everyone, murder, rape and pillage and be a darkworker to your hearts' content (ie. taking action only for gain and in your interest and basically ignoring others and the consequences of your actions as they relate to others), but if you do, it’s likely that you will be put at greater risk of someone (say, a another darkworker) trying to get rid of you in order to usurp your power.

On the other hand, you can go the more stable route (the one Dan.Linehan advocates), but that path has moderate risk/reward. You will not take as many risks (such as taking actions that have severe consequences on other people that may threaten your existence and decrease your chances of survival or your chances to maintain your position of power that you earned from all your selfish darkworker acts), but you will not ultimately gain as much power.

I propose an intelligent darkworker wouldn't endanger his/her ability to further contribute to him/herself unless that was his/her particular style and s/he was most effective doing that. So generally if service to self was the prime motivation of a darkworker, it probably wouldn’t be advantageous to start killing people in the quest for greater power unless that particular individual was able to garner great motivation from that act (such that it is his/her style/preference) that would provide more power (even if it is at a higher risk) then going the more steady route.

Originally Posted by Glass Joe

One cool thing about being a greyworker is that you blend in with the crowd. Since you don't pick sides, you are free to associate with any side.

The saying "jack of all trades, master of none" comes to mind. It is my belief that your potential can only be available to you when you are congruent with your own personal style (what you want to do), your strengths/weaknesses (what you can do), your conscience (what you feel you should do), and whatever will allow you to continue to put your potential to good use (what you need to do).

Basically it's a process of optimisation. Think of your potential as flowing water, your most ingrained conditioning and particular style/preferences as a pipeline that the water (your potential) flows through, and “you” as the building that contains the pipeline (in that your particular style/preferences exist within you, but are not you, since you are able to change them freely and still be “you”). If the pipeline has many obtrusions that obstruct the flow, your potential won't flow through effectively and you won't reap the rewards, much like a car won’t run very efficiently if it isn’t getting all the petrol it needs. However, if the pipe is clear, the water (your potential) will flow through efficiently.

Likewise (this is a bit of a sloppy extension of the above analogy, but work with me), if the building (ie. you) is holding the pipeline (ie. your most ingrained conditioning, style, and preferences) in such a way that is not congruent with the particular design of the pipeline, it simply won't flow, or at least, flow very efficiently. It'd be like trying to get water to flow up a tunnel that has more obstructions when it is angled upwards and less obstructions when angled downwards. Or, as another example, it’d be like someone who prefers painting over programming. You don’t put a painter in a programmers job -- their potential won’t flow through since the medium of expression (the pipeline) is not conductive to their potential.

If the pipeline (your most ingrained conditioning, style, and preferences) you are currently using within your building (you) is angled downwards (ie. the angle the water -- your potential -- will flow most efficiently), the water will be able to flow at full blast (see figure 1 below). But if your pipeline provides resistance to the water flow when angled a certain way, it makes sense to angle the way that the water will flow efficiently, or replace it with another pipe (see figure 2 below). It may take time to replace the pipe (condition a new style, preferences, and turn your weaknesses into strengths), but if it allows the water (your potential) to flow more efficiently, it will be worth it. So, in other words, if you want your potential to flow freely, it must be in relative harmony with your style, preferences, strengths and weaknesses.

Figure 1. A pipe that would flow more efficiently when angled downwards:

________________________________

____/_/________/_/_______/_/_____


Figure 2. A pipe that would flow more efficiently when angled upwards:

_________________________________

____\_\________\_\________\_\_____


Now if all of that makes no sense to you, here’s another analogy that doesn’t try to blend in with the water/pipe analogy:

Think of a car trying to roll down the following surfaces, and lets assume the surfaces are angled downwards.

Figure 1. Surface 1


____/ /________/ /_______/ /_______


Figure 2. Surface 2


____\ \________\ \________\ \_______


It should become clear that a car would roll down surface one more efficiently then surface 2, as surface 2 would provide more resistance and may even manage to stop the car. Surface one would be far from optimal, but hopefully now you understand my point -- your potential must “drive” over or “flow” through a surface or tunnel that is conductive to the flow, not one that hinders it. (If that still makes no sense, just call it a bad analogy and I’ll try to do better next time.)

So you can dabble as a “greyworker”, but basically what Steve is saying is that for the Law of Attraction to work effectively, the energy flow must be polarised one way or another. You still have all the same options available to you on either polarised side, it's just that the motivation and intention behind such actions would be different.

Eg. A lightworker would create a business to somehow contribute outside of him/herself, while a darkworker would create a business to contribute to him/herself. Both may end up taking the same actions, but there would be very different reasons each individual would take those actions.

So, bringing all of back to your original point, what I’m saying that if you don’t bring the Law of Attraction into this, yes, what you say would be accurate. However, if you do bring in the LoA, taking actions from each polarity would cancel each other out and you’d end up with a mess, or at least, no progress. To make efficient progress, Steve suggests that one must pick a polarity and stick with it. Of course, if you/anyone else are not so much concerned with the benefits polarisation provides you, being a greyworker is a relevant option, but if what Steve says about the Law of Attraction is accurate, it's far from the most optimal if you want to make any serious accomplishments.

If after all this I still make little sense (which is quite likely, since I’m not able to put as much time into this post as I would like but thought posting would be better then not posting), read (or re-read) Steve’s blog Polarity blog post as it explains all about everything using much better analogies then what I used in this post.

[Narz]

Yep, another Middle Way mofo here.

I've enjoyed some of Steve's stuff (though the quality has gone down this year) but the polarity stuff is quite inane, by far the worst bit (the "life as a simulation" really long podcast was delusional but at least entertaining).

Choosing between these silly categories is like choosing between giving and receiving oral sex. I'll take both thanks (heh, I certainly enjoy the "middle way" )! .

[impaul99]

Glad I'm not the only person who feels this way.

When I think about polarizing only in one direction it totally reminds me of an event I used to witness when I was a little kid amongst my parent's friends. One relative would come over for a visit and since this was Europe and not everything was available at stores at all times, the relative would bring over a bag of good coffee (as an example). They would say "I was at the store the other day and they just brought in this shippment of good coffee, so I bought a couple of bags. Here's one for you."

And then my parents would say: "Thank you so much! How much do I owe you?"

Relative: "Oh stop it, it was nothing."
Parents: "No, No, come on, how much was it? 10, 20?"
Relative: "No, no, cmon..."
Parents: "No, you come on, how much was the coffee?"
Relative: "Oh I don't know, 15, but don't worry yourself, it's ok"
Parents: "No, cmon! Here's 20, take it"
Relative: "No! I can't take it, cmon."
Parents: "No, you come on, I'll put it in your pocket anyways so just take it."
...
And on and on this would go for 10 minutes every single time someone did something like this. As a kid I remember thinking..."Just give me the money then! I'll take it if you don't want it!"

In the end, the relative would walk out with the 15 or 20 bucks in his pocket for the coffee cost plus some food to take home to his family or whatever, but it was this stupid game of back and forth almost like the money was cursed or something.

I don't even remember where or when I learned that if someone gave me something I just accepted it without playing this stupid game. (Of course I'm not talking about a drug dealer offering me drugs or anything like that, but gifts given with love I mean.) In this way, by accepting what others want to share with me I always felt the channel was open for me to receive and then give back to them in return.

It is the same thing with receiving from the Universe. I hold no guilt receiving a car, or money or toys or food or anything else the abundant universe chooses to give me. I don't see myself as a "bad person" or a "darkworker" because of this either, no more than any of us would consider ourselves bad people for breathing the abundant air available to us or soaking up the abundant sun outside. It's funny because I think that we all agree that soaking up the sun on a sunny day doesn't take away any sun from anyone else right? Because it's completely abundant we feel no guilt basking in the sun on a beautiful day. Neither do we feel guilty or bad about taking a breath of fresh air. Then why would we feel guilty or feel that we are darkworkers for taking the abundant supply of money in the world? Or a car, or a toy or any other resource.

I think those kinds of feelings of guilt only come up if we believe in a lack mentality where me accepting $10 in payment means that some kid out there who's starving has $10 less in his pocket. If you live out of pure love abundant mindframe than there is no lack, there is only abundance.

Anyway, I'm going to stick to a Greyworker status. I really see no value or benefit to being a Lightworker or a Darkworker.

Also, for those who believe that ACIM accurately reports the word of Jesus, the course states that your behaviour doesn't matter anyways, only your feeling about the behaviour and that you practice forgiveness with yourself and everyone around you.

I would also guess that all of us on here are actually Greyworkers even if in all these discussions we're saying we're Lightworkers or Darkworkers, Steve and Erin included. I think if they were actual Lightworkers who only acted out of pure love for even just 24hours (like Jesus did), they would be Christ.

If you don't believe me, ask yourself the simple question: Would Jesus wake up in the morning and go to the gym? What for? That's a darkworker / fear motivated intention in my books.

[JHL]

I think the polarity theory succeeds as a clever analogy. Its quite an impressive feat to develop a construct to overlay onto the human condition and have it work with a reasonably accuracy and consistency.

But I also think its a case of saying hydrogen dioxide, when water will suffice.

In a single sentence, can anyone sum up their take-out of the theory?

For me (a 'love' polarity tending person) its something like: try to be more loving in all respects in your life.

Whats your take-out?

[nownow]

I don't understand how Polarzation will make the LoA more effective, except if you think so which is fine. The need to be polarized for the LoA to be most effective will be true for you if that's what you focus on because that's your focus. The the LoA is about getting what you focus on plain and simple. For any other focus to determine the effectiveness of focussing itself is itself a focus. It's a subjective world.

[fretho]

Yeah I think grey seems more sane in the long run. Lightworker and darkworker are both powerful paradigms, and I can see myself being empowered using either role. But sticking to one? Not sure. I could try and stick to light-side, but there's empowering facets of the self-interest side (which in the long run enable one to serve others).

For example, I want to become a really good computer programmer. That's a role I can probably achieve fastest as a darkworker. To achieve it I'll need plenty of logic, ambition, and drive. But to be a good family man, I can best do that with a lightworker mentality. I'll need to be able to show compassion, love, and support for others.

Perhaps a beneficial exercise would be to sort out all the various roles and missions you have in life and assign a dark or light preference to them.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by JHL

But I also think its a case of saying hydrogen dioxide, when water will suffice.

Except that replacing water with hydrogen dioxide won't quench your thirst. But it will bleach your moustache!

dihydrogen monoxide is a much more refreshing beverage

(note that I do agree with the actual point you're making )

[JHL]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Except that replacing water with hydrogen dioxide won't quench your thirst. But it will bleach your moustache!

dihydrogen monoxide is a much more refreshing beverage

(note that I do agree with the actual point you're making )

Ha ha! Oops! Thanks for the clarification - wouldn't want to be bleaching my colon any time soon!

[The Coronet]

I think its much more simple. It really does just come down to whether you are motivated by love or fear and nothing else. I dont think it has anything to do with whether you want something for yourself or for the sake of achieveing your own goals. I think by default when you follow a goal that is truly for the love of it, it will always be of the highest benifit for everyone. Because you will be living by example, you will be showing others how they can be happy to.

For example, I am a singer and DJ, but I have a huge fear of performing in public. I have managed to get over it enough to get behind the decks, but Im still really scared of doing anything more upfront! Yesterday i was asked to introduce a guy who was performing on a stage which required me to get on the mic. I was petrified but felt to embarrassed to say no. I sat there talking to this guy, my head filled with fear not really hearing anything he was telling me, thinking about how much I needed to get over this for me to ever reach my goals in life. Then it dawned on me to forget about all of that and do act out of love and to introduce this guy the best way I could so he felt comfortable and do the best job i could for the lady employing me. It really helped a lot, I relaxed and did the job just fine. So I acted out of love and in doing so helped myself, because afterwards I felt well proud of myself. When you act out of love you know that everything will work out just fine, you trust that things are just as they should be and that you can concentrate on serving others and that you will get everything you need. Is that selfish because ultimately I am being driven by the desire to be happy, at peace and forfilled. You can get away from this and this is the beauty of the world, I dont have to sacrafice what i want for others to be a lightworker, I just have to be sincere about what I really love and want in life. Thank God that it is this way :-)

[fretho]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Except that replacing water with hydrogen dioxide won't quench your thirst. But it will bleach your moustache!

dihydrogen monoxide is a much more refreshing beverage

(note that I do agree with the actual point you're making )

H2O2 would be dihydrogen dioxide, wouldn't it?

My take-out is that we should TAKE NOTICE of when we are using love or self-interest as a motivator for any particular intention. It's a strategy for raising your consciousness level. At least that's how I plan to use it.

One thing I notice is that the terms Steve uses for dark/light are probably different from how a darkworker would describe them. A skilled darkworker wouldn't say they are controlled by fear, but more by pride -- the desire and ability to overcome and prevent fear. They would probably perceive lightworkers as being controlled by guilt, whereas a successful lightworker really is able to overcome and prevent guilt through love.

Positive: love vs. pride
Negative: guilt vs. fear

I believe I sometimes use love, and sometimes pride. Depending on whether guilt (evil within) or fear (evil without) is the issue that needs overcome.

Does this make sense to anybody?