If selfishness isn't evil, then what is evil?

[yossarian]

Oh btw I forgot to mention..

The "dangerous confusion" IMO is starting to walk down the dark path without realising the full implications of that path. Walking down it while thinking that you aren't eventually going to be heavily drawn towards directly hurting others. If you go far enough, soon enough you'll reach a point where you have to enslave others, and you'll be stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Darkwork under Pavlina Polarity is about absorbing energy and hoarding it and intentional selfishness, and these things are negative polarity whether you call them "darkworking (a new concept)" or not. The selfishness without hurting others is basically just ankle-deep negative polarity.

The choice will be between depolarization (which is an expensive readjustment) and harming someone (which some people may not want to do).

[JHL]

Originally Posted by yossarian

...and it seems I totally disagree with JHL on everything.

Say, are you related to my girlfriend??!

Originally Posted by yossarian

...Of course I also don't buy terming the two polarities love vs. fear, since negative polarity is not based on fear it's based on love-of-self. Either polarity experiences fear, but the fear is of different things. At least that's my opinion..

I agree! (hope you were sitting down for that one). In my view, I would label the negative aspect of the scale as "Lack of love" and its opposite as "Love". Love is defined as pure connectedness, and lack of love as seperation. Fear is, of course, at its highest at the "lack of love" pole, while at "love" there is an absence of fear.

Originally Posted by yossarian

Anyway I don't mean to preach, I think people should believe whatever feels most congruent. I guess I feel compelled to speak up when I see what looks to me like dangerous confusion. But who am I to judge? I'm sure it's all for the best.

I, for one, have really appreciated your thoughts on this and its made me think and clarify my own thoughts too, so thank you for bringing this up. I hope I havent been too much of a frustration to you - I'm not sure that I've understood what you are really saying. I get that you are earnestly trying to get something across, but I believe I have missed it. Perhaps at some point I might actually look at steve's darkworker/lightworker theory in more detail. I suspect that would be helpful for any future discussion on the topic

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by JHL

I agree! (hope you were sitting down for that one). In my view, I would label the negative aspect of the scale as "Lack of love" and its opposite as "Love". Love is defined as pure connectedness, and lack of love as seperation. Fear is, of course, at its highest at the "lack of love" pole, while at "love" there is an absence of fear.

Sorry to say but you don't actually agree

A highly polarized negative entity has much love, but the love is directed inwards towards the self.

Positive polarity directs love outwards, and includes the self, because the love is for the entire creation.

Negative polarity fear is typified by fear of others and fear of their infringement. (Positive people experience this fear too, but as they polarize more and more it goes away almost completely.)

Positive polarity fear is typified by fear of the self harming others. (Negative people have this fear as well, but as they polarize more and more it goes away almost completely.)

Negative-syndrome (Just one syndrome of many) is therefore when a negative entity fears harming others, because this fear cripples him from further polarization and effectiveness.

Positive-syndrome (again, one of many) is when a positive entity fears himself being harmed, because this fear cripples his outward expression of love.

Of course essentially every type of fear could be called a syndrome IMO. I see no benefit to any of them. Polarization, on either front, is when you cultivate the love. Love for yourself or love for everything, the power is in the love.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Oh btw I forgot to mention..

The "dangerous confusion" IMO is starting to walk down the dark path without realising the full implications of that path. Walking down it while thinking that you aren't eventually going to be heavily drawn towards directly hurting others. If you go far enough, soon enough you'll reach a point where you have to enslave others, and you'll be stuck between a rock and a hard place.

I suspect going down the dark path to the point of enslaving others is not what Steve's darkworker idea is. It is more like Steve's darkworker syndrome. But I can agree with your statements on their own - negative paths of always looking out of only yourself, causes everyting to get worse.

Darkwork under Pavlina Polarity is about absorbing energy and hoarding it and intentional selfishness, and these things are negative polarity whether you call them "darkworking (a new concept)" or not. The selfishness without hurting others is basically just ankle-deep negative polarity.

The Pavlina darkworker is also told to avoid the syndrome. A healthy Pavlinian darkworker has been able to not have classic (evil) negative polarity.

The choice will be between depolarization (which is an expensive readjustment) and harming someone (which some people may not want to do).

A negative polarity person, by definition, is going about harming, that's what defines that state. Negative means hurting or not being healthy (same thing pain/bad health).

Depolarization - I don't understand what you mean by that. Depolarization of what model? Pavlina? or classical (evil/good)?

[yossarian]

In the classical model i'm talking about negative is not about hurting people.

It's about selfishness.

It just so happens that selfishness leads to hurting people.

Let's say you have an axis - a line - that indicates your polarity.

|------------------------------------------------------------|

The right side of this line is total positive polarization. Left side is total negative.

People start out here:

|-----------------------------X-----------------------------|

If they polarize towards the dark, whether they do it THINKING they are under "Pavlina polarity" or some other polarity, they are doing the behaviour that causes them to polarize, and they change to look like this:

|----------------------X-------------------------------------|

Eventually they run up against an obstacle and they have to make a choice.

|-------------HX---------------------------------------------|

The H is an obstacle that the person has to pass. He passes it by rededicating himself to the negative polarity - by proving that he is dedicated to selfishness.

In this case the H represents a decision between hurting someone for personal gain (like say, theft) and not doing it. The universe provided the person with the opportunity, and if the person abstains from the opportunity, he will depolarize like this:

|-------------H-----X---------------------------------------|

If he seizes the opportunity and commits theft for his own selfishness, then he instead looks like this:

|---------X--H-----------------------------------------------|

[wolfgang]

Why isn't that a description of darkworker syndrome?

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

Why isn't that a description of darkworker syndrome?

because darkworker syndrome implies something bad is happening

but since further polarization is the goal, Theft is the correct choice for a darkworker. The more polarized you are, the stronger you are, and the more spiritually developed, in a sense. Literally your magic power increases and the power of your intentions increase - your manifestations come sooner, stronger and more precisely.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by yossarian

If they polarize towards the dark, whether they do it THINKING they are under "Pavlina polarity" or some other polarity, they are doing the behaviour that causes them to polarize, and they change to look like this:

Negative polarity and darkworker polarity maybe different things.

I only say this out of trying to understand steve's model. Since he wrote that darkworkers are not causing themselves or others harm.

I think you are argueing for the classical negative/positive polarity and lumping Steve's ideas as the same thing. Which they aren't right? If a darkworker can become more effective, then a darkworker isn't the same axis as negative polarity.

To define negative polarity, isn't that just saying going in the direction of something that doesn't help or work and may cause harm? I don't think Steve was trying to say, polarize darkworker and make sure you are causing things to get worse. He did say that is the syndrome of darkworkers, that can happen.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by yossarian

because darkworker syndrome implies something bad is happening

but since further polarization is the goal, Theft is the correct choice for a darkworker. The more polarized you are, the stronger you are, and the more spiritually developed, in a sense. Literally your magic power increases and the power of your intentions increase - your manifestations come sooner, stronger and more precisely.

darkworker syndrome implies something isn't working very well (and maybe people are getting hurt).

I don't think further polarization (of Pavlina's kind) means to fall into the syndrome. Further polarization means being able to continue feeding the self and being able to recognize other's benifit and let that side happen, although other's benifiting is not the motivation behind the goals. Polarization, when taken to lower levels of consciousness heads toward the syndrome.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

To define negative polarity, isn't that just saying going in the direction of something that doesn't help or work and may cause harm?

Absolutely not. it's "negative" in the same sense that electrons are negative. There are billions of electrons holding the world together - there is nothing wrong with them. Yet we call electrons "negatively charged."

The term negative is not meant to imply that it's someone "bad" or neccessarily destructive. I would say it is "evil" in a certain sense, but destruction is not the point.

The key thing is selfishness. Negative polarity is about selfishness and self-love. It just so happens that a strong selfishness will cause people to do acts considered by society to be immoral. But that is just society - what do they know?

Steve's advice on how to cultivate each polarity is IMO exactly right. To cultivate a "dark" polarity you focus on being selfish and on absorbing energy to yourself for your own benefit. But a natural part of this, along the path you travel, is going to be coercing others. Whether or not you know about the path, you are still traveling it.

Steve recommends the exact same practices to follow darkwork that the Church of Satan recommends - and this is what we'd expect otherwise there would be some incongruency somewhere. But the practices are the same - absorb energy into yourself for your own usage and benefit, focus on your own well being and interests entirely.

If the practices are the same, it doesnt matter what you call it or what you predict it will do. The path will be the same.

My bet is just that it will be helpful to people to know about this path before they travel it and find the obstacles on their own. I think a person with a strong bias towards unity may travel down the dark path for awhile, and may eventually realise it's not for him and then intentionally repolarize towards the positive. We always have free will. So in truth it's not much of a danger, and I hope I don't scare anyone from exploring that side of life.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Absolutely not. it's "negative" in the same sense that electrons are negative. There are billions of electrons holding the world together - there is nothing wrong with them. Yet we call electrons "negatively charged."

It sounds like the term is to imply that polarizing negative is possibly going to cause harm. Is that not what started your thread?
You said:"IMO you can't take the negative path without eventually enslaving others as a matter of course. That doesn't mean it's bad - slavery is a very natural thing and I encourage anyone who truly feels the call of the dark to pursue that."
So salvery is not to be viewed as bad? Huh? Then why do some many fight against that?

Alright - negative, at least you said this much, takes much longer to arrive at the same place being in positive polarity. So there's that negative to the negative polarity.

The key thing is selfishness. Negative polarity is about selfishness and self-love. It just so happens that a strong selfishness will cause people to do acts considered by society to be immoral. But that is just society - what do they know?

I actually posted stuff like this too. All wars are from selfishness motives. But that is what I would call low level of consciouessness, not darkworker polarity.


[quote]Steve's advice on how to cultivate each polarity is IMO exactly right. To cultivate a "dark" polarity you focus on being selfish and on absorbing energy to yourself for your own benefit. But a natural part of this, along the path you travel, is going to be coercing others. Whether or not you know about the path, you are still traveling it.

Steve recommends the exact same practices to follow darkwork that the Church of Satan recommends - and this is what we'd expect otherwise there would be some incongruency somewhere. But the practices are the same - absorb energy into yourself for your own usage and benefit, focus on your own well being and interests entirely.

If the practices are the same, it doesnt matter what you call it or what you predict it will do. The path will be the same.[quote]
Going into the negative polarity of yours is going into darkworker (or low level of consciouessness) syndrome.

My bet is just that it will be helpful to people to know about this path before they travel it and find the obstacles on their own. I think a person with a strong bias towards unity may travel down the dark path for awhile, and may eventually realise it's not for him and then intentionally repolarize towards the positive. We always have free will. So in truth it's not much of a danger, and I hope I don't scare anyone from exploring that side of life.

So you are argueing for the idea that the polarity changes as we grow (become more conscious)? And since you see classical negative polarity as the same as darkworker, it's all just a matter of the level of consciousness - nothing new.

I keep tyring to see that Steve's idea is not LOC stuff. Does he actually say, look, darkworkers are at low LOC and lightworkers are at high LOC? NO, I think so. Your classical negative polarity is the same as LOC axis but not whatever the heck Steve's polarity idea is.

[Theo77]

Well if you go far enough in the Lightworker path you will get martyred.

If you don't polarize, you will hurt others and other people will hurt you.

So if you polarize as a darkworker and you end up becoming so powerful, you are above the law, them yes Yossarian, you are probably right you will have to end up killing people. You Know, like if you become, a world dictator, or a CEO if an enormous multi-national corporation associated with the US Military Industrial Complex. You will make decisions on the level of causing life and death to other people.

I think if you get that high, you will have to do that even if you end up being a person history ends up considering a good guy.

Hitler is the old cliche stand by. But he never vaporized hundreds of thousands of people with a nuclear bomb. He burned them in gas ovens.

Its hard for me to say that wheras, gassing jews is evil, vaporizing Japenese is good.

Personally though, I think you can partake on a darkworker path without progressing to that kind of a level. What if you were a darkworker and you wanted to be an artist or a musician?

What kind of famous artist or musician would be faced with making life or death decisions?

[starlet]

Look at my sig. Selfishness can be good and evil. If you choose to steal, or trample, or harm someone in your bid for what you want, then yes, it is evil. But if you believe the Universe is abundant and that everything you want will come to you or you will be shown the way without harming anyone, then it is not evil.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Theo77

Well if you go far enough in the Lightworker path you will get martyred.

If you don't polarize, you will hurt others and other people will hurt you.

So if you polarize as a darkworker and you end up becoming so powerful, you are above the law, them yes Yossarian, you are probably right you will have to end up killing people. You Know, like if you become, a world dictator, or a CEO if an enormous multi-national corporation associated with the US Military Industrial Complex. You will make decisions on the level of causing life and death to other people.

I think if you get that high, you will have to do that even if you end up being a person history ends up considering a good guy.

Hitler is the old cliche stand by. But he never vaporized hundreds of thousands of people with a nuclear bomb. He burned them in gas ovens.

Its hard for me to say that wheras, gassing jews is evil, vaporizing Japenese is good.

Personally I think nuking the japanese was one of the great evil acts of the century. But thats another story

Personally though, I think you can partake on a darkworker path without progressing to that kind of a level. What if you were a darkworker and you wanted to be an artist or a musician?

What kind of famous artist or musician would be faced with making life or death decisions?

It doesnt have to be life or death, and it doenst have to be in this lifetime.

For a musician it could be as simple as lying - lying hurts people and so it's something a lightworker is going to generally not do. It could be a musician stealing music from another and passing it off as his own. He could try and destroy the competition to keep his music on the forefront. He could treat the people around in a dominating and coercive way rather than a loving and accepting way.

[Theo77]

For me, my pride would prevent me from stealing anothers work and passing it off as my own. I have too much confidence in my own ability. If no one found out, it would still matter to me.

You also seem to be assuming that a darkworker is simply after fame and fortune and is indifferent to the avenue to get there. You don't seem to allow that people can enjoy exercizing a gift and seeking to lead a fulfilling life doing what they love.

People that enjoy creating art or music, enjoy creating art or music. Tricking people is not the same thing. You make it sound as if darkworker musicians would naturally idolize Milli Vanilli!

[Theo77]

To me its about purity. Art for arts sake. Do it because I enjoy it. And being honest with myself, I want to make money at it. Recognition is good too!

To say, I am doing art to help starving children in the third world would be a lie. I think a direct approach would be lot more efficient. I think a light worker may be faced with giving up art in order to be a missionary or an aid worker.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Theo77

To me its about purity. Art for arts sake. Do it because I enjoy it. And being honest with myself, I want to make money at it. Recognition is good too!

To say, I am doing art to help starving children in the third world would be a lie. I think a direct approach would be lot more efficient. I think a light worker may be faced with giving up art in order to be a missionary or an aid worker.

And a darkworker approach to becoming a muscian may be faced with being tempted to sell out - where one starts to figure out what people want and do that just so the admiration from the fans happens (that would be syndrome-ish).

[starlet]

Originally Posted by Theo77

You also seem to be assuming that a darkworker is simply after fame and fortune and is indifferent to the avenue to get there. You don't seem to allow that people can enjoy exercizing a gift and seeking to lead a fulfilling life doing what they love.

Exactly. I could not have said it better myself

[yossarian]

not every behavior in the world is polarized

99% of people are unpolarized

so you cant just say "what about this arbitrary behavior? is that lightwork or darkwork?" because 99% of those arbitrary behaviours are just normal humans doing normal unpolarized things

if you do art for the sake of art, dont exactly care about other people but are unwilling to dedicate yourself to youself, and just want to dick around in life and explore the various pleasures of the material world, polarization is not for you

polarization is a rare spiritual calling that, in any given lifetime, very few people undertake and very few achieve.

it's not a universal model for human behaviour.

it applies to the highly successful only - the extremes of society. It applies to Mohandas Gandhi and Julius Caesar. It doesn't to Bill the truck-driver or Apu working at the quicki-mart.

You want to do music? Why? Just to enjoy the sensory stimulation of life? You can do that without playing music, you can just enjoy the music created by others. Why MAKE music? Why CREATE? It's hard work to create, especially to create something meaningful and good. I can say that you won't be highly successful at music without polarization. Some do music to tell a story and therefore help the world, some do music for fame and fortune. Those two achieve great success, and there is no third category.

99% of the people in the world are mediocre and 99% don't polarize. This isn't a bad thing it's just how it is. Spirituality is the last thing on a typical person's mind.

[Theo77]

Yossarian,
So How would you categorize getting all preachy on a message board?

You aren't making money, but I guess you get to sound smart. Self centered?

You could say you are "helping" people I guess...

Well, I got some more dicking around to do, I mean art!

These discussions are just too deep for my little mind.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Theo77

Yossarian,
So How would you categorize getting all preachy on a message board?

My intentions are to learn and to teach.

My overriding goal in the last part of this thread is to give air-time to a certain view so that if it resonates with anyone who reads this thread, they can be started down the path of exploring that view, and lead themselves out of confusion.

I'm content.

[Theo77]

Do you realize how arrogant you sound, Yossarian?

If people disagree with you they must be confused? You think you are talking over my head?

Hey, I enjoy spirited debate. It stimulates my thinking. But I'm into this kind of ************. I'm fairly well read in philosophy and esoteric subjects.

One thing Steve doesn't do a lot of for some reason is quote his sources with this polarity stuff. I think it gives the impression, that its a lot more original than it actually is. I also notice, he has a follwing here, which would make sense. Its his message board. But one thing to keep in mind is that all these talk about esoteric subjects is all based on made up models and mental maps.

The quote Robert Anton Wilson "The map is not the territory"

He was so serious about that that eventually he stopped using the word "is" when talking about esoteric subjects. He created a language called "English Prime" totally leaves out "to be"

So lets put things in context here. Anyone who thinks they have arrived hasn't. That goes for everybody.

[yossarian]

No comments I made were directed to you specifically.

I have no idea if you personally are confused, by confusion I was referring to the forum in general.

There is more than one way to make sense of the world. If you are content with your interpretation then you probably won't get anything useful from me. I'm not speaking for the benefit of people who already have solidly formed opinions - i'm speaking for the benefit of those who are confused and know themselves to be confused.

If that's not you then i'm not talking to you.

It's a subjective world and there are infinite ways to look at it, to organize it, to map it. I just have one way, that will appeal to certain people and not appeal to others. There is nothing wrong with variety. Everything is as it should be.

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by yossarian

polarization is a rare spiritual calling that, in any given lifetime, very few people undertake and very few achieve.

It seems as if you were already well-familiar with the concept of polarization before Steve brought it up. If that's true, what was your understanding of it before you read the "Pavlina" version of it?

I don't like the whole concept at all, or how it has been presented, and it is completely irrelevent and counter-productive in my life at this stage. I also don't like some things that Steve has said concerning people who don't "polarize" and I find some of those things to be outright untrue and completely lacking in understanding for the variety in the different types of lives and states of mind people find themselves in in the world and it's hard for me to understand why someone who is full of love and so well-off and well-adjusted in all areas of his life would write and presume such things.

i.e. "They live in a very half-assed manner. There’s no fire behind their eyes. They don’t even know why they’re here, so they go through the motions in a confused daze, like a cartoon character who just got bonked on the head."

"This whole “Personal Development for Smart People” website is really aimed at that 1%. It’s not a “for dummies” site...My role is to help people who are supposed to be in that 1% to come to terms with what that means and to accept the responsibility of being a “smart person.” "

"One really intelligent and aware individual has far more leverage to make a difference on this planet than a thousand drones, so I perceive that my greatest leverage is to help and encourage those who have the potential to make huge differences on this planet in the years ahead."

From this, I really shouldn't be on his site at all, nor should anyone who does not understand or agree with this "polarization." Not only has he not managed to explain "polarization" and the two sides of it (and everything in between) in a way I and a multitude of others can even confidently understand it, but we have been alienated and no longer qualify for his help anymore - not that he can control if one of us gets help from his site, but, in accordance with his words, that would be accidental and not his intention.

I am a drone and I live my life "half-assedly" and with no passion or purpose and I am also stupid. This revelation Steve has had about me and my life is not uplifting or encouraging - not surprisingly, it has the exact opposite effect. Even a stupid person can feel, if not immediately, then upon reflection, these words are not loving and can't be from someone who is full of love for others, or who is "love-polarized." I don't want to be like Steve. I already am like him in this respect. I can say and feel things like that about other people too and I think it is bad - that's why I want to change.

It makes me feel all over again why I cannot socially belong to an organized religion. Everyone finds reasons to exclude others - to exclude me. This is specifically why I have never gotten along well in religious social groups, regardless of what religion. Almost all require you to believe and think and act like they do, or else you are exempt from receiving any kind of help or even from being in their company. This is specifically not supposed to be a feature of "personal development".

How many people have embraced or are desperately trying to embrace "Pavlina Polarity" just because Steve has said that if they don't, they are drones, stupid and living half-assedly with no purpose or passion?


Note: I will probably eventually delete most of this post, since most of it doesn't deal with the thread topic and I will probably regret having written the things I wrote in it.

[yossarian]

The 1% thing is not the most generous way to express this specific thing.

It doesn't matter whether you're in the 1% or not. You don't need to wrack your brain over that question. It's an irrelevant issue.

If you read the short description of polarity and you're not feeling it, then you probably just don't need it. It's not that you're stupid or something, it's probably that you're actually just naturally advanced past requiring consious control over that particular issue.

People like me and Steve who are very logic-oriented tend to require these kinds of logical-models to be effective. Some people, who are more intutive, thrive without them.

Different strokes for different folks.

Most people who do polarize - especially throughout history - just do it unconsiously and probably never even realise that they've been "polarizing". Most people who polarize to the positive (and for every 1 negative, there are 10 positives) are probably never even aware that there is a "dark side path" they could take.

Not everyone needs to see the path in order to walk it, and some people don't need to walk it at all.

It's my belief that each of us incarnated for a specific, unique reason. That reason is ours to discover and ours to choose.

If you find yourself drawn to the consious principle of polarity then I recommend you read The Law of One: The Ra Material which is free to download on this site:

L/L Research Library

If you find yourself thinking, "that's stupid" about this whole polarization idea, then you're correct, it's probably stupid and unneeded for your particular purposes.

Spirituality is not One Size Fits All.

In the end, you don't need Steve to guide you, since your higher self is there constantly watching over. Don't put Steve and all his human flaws on a pedestal. He's just a messenger.

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by yossarian

People like me and Steve who are very logic-oriented tend to require these kinds of logical-models to be effective.

Well, I noticed this about him back when I first found this site and he used computer programming analogies to explain "The True Nature of Reality" and I knew immediately I was at a great disadvantage on this website and probably wasnt' even "smart" enough to be here - analogies in blog posts relating to vectors, mathematics and the workings of electricity have further confirmed that .

I can't apply things or change myself by consciously analyzing them in order to understand them first. If I like or accept something, it feels true or good somehow, I want to incorporate it into myself and it seems like that just happens without any intellectual effort through ideas and feelings that come in my head based on a general idea and understanding of the thing in question. Anything I try to apply my intellect to turns into a mess and I lose the flow and all of a sudden, I don't even know what I was trying to do anymore - until I withdraw from the intellect and do it naturally again. (This applies to virtually everything I can think of, including things like dancing)

Originally Posted by yossarian

If you find yourself thinking, "that's stupid" about this whole polarization idea, then you're correct, it's probably stupid and unneeded for your particular purposes.

I have never thought it was stupid. I don't even understand what he means by it and all of the things associated with it, so I can't conclude something is stupid if I don't even understand it. I gave up trying to understand it, because he is not answering questions and I don't really believe anyone else here understands it thoroughly and properly.

Originally Posted by yossarian

Don't put Steve and all his human flaws on a pedestal. He's just a messenger.

That's a worrying thought...whose messenger would he be?

Despite the differences, the things you have written that I have read and understood, I agree with.

But enough about me

Does all that mean that you were not familiar with polarity prior to Steve's article about it?

[JHL]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

"One really intelligent and aware individual has far more leverage to make a difference on this planet than a thousand drones, so I perceive that my greatest leverage is to help and encourage those who have the potential to make huge differences on this planet in the years ahead."

I havent read the article by Steve in which the above appeared, but I would like to comment on it. The thinking behind the statement is reasonable and probably rooted in good intent. However I dont believe that intelligence is a terribly important trait when it comes to effecting huge change.

If we consider people like Nelson Mandela, Rosa Parks or Mother Teresa - the huge differences they made had nothing whatsoever to do with their intelligence, and everything to do with personal integrity, principle and courage.

The people who influence me most are the people with the qualities I mention above. Intelligence is a just an aptitude one is born with, like the ability to play the harp or hit a tennis ball well. There are far more important qualities that define those who are great among us.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

Does all that mean that you were not familiar with polarity prior to Steve's article about it?

I was well-versed in polarity before reading about Steve.

It's an old idea, but most good ideas are.

The major difference between polarity as I know it, and Pavlina Polarity, is characterising darkwork as fear-based rather than love-of-self based. The other major difference is the statement that darkworkers don't harm others while pursuing selfish goals. There is a lot more symmetry to my understanding of polarity, which IMO makes it simpler and easier to understand and use. And more accurate.

Besides those things Steve's interpretation fits with my own. There is still a lot of stuff that Steve has not yet covered, and there is just a boatload of symmetry in the universe that relates to polarity. But knowing about it is truly academic - living it is the real virtue - and you don't need to know it consciously in order to live it.

I agree with JHL that intelligence is overrated. Faith is underrated. The ability to look at the mystery of universe and see beauty is the fundamental quality of grace and divinity. All one must do to reach their potential is look to that mystery in silent reverence. It will only be complicated if you make it complicated. There is no "doing" required, as we were not put here to do. We were put here to "be" and so never be dissatisfied with "just being".

As you lighten yourself, you lighten the world. Existence itself is a soothing balm for every ailment.

[yossarian]

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by JHL

If we consider people like Nelson Mandela, Rosa Parks or Mother Teresa - the huge differences they made had nothing whatsoever to do with their intelligence, and everything to do with personal integrity, principle and courage.

The people who influence me most are the people with the qualities I mention above. Intelligence is a just an aptitude one is born with, like the ability to play the harp or hit a tennis ball well. There are far more important qualities that define those who are great among us.

I totally agree. I have known three exceedingly intelligent people (two in my immediate family - not me) and, all aware of their superior intelligence and the extreme advantage it gives them over others, use it to control others and keep people "in their place" so-to-speak. In fact, Steve is the first exceedingly intelligent person I have known of (personally) who is not using his intelligence to the detriment of others.

I don't think extreme intelligence is so important either (in general), but qualities such as you mentioned are and it is important how you treat other people. In the end, all of the stuff discussed here in theory is to be applied in relation to people in our lives and I think how a person treats others is more important, and more truthfully revealing about them, than any of these theoretical concepts and methods.