Additional clip for dual identities You Tube; contextual expansion
Expanding the clip on dual identity, which proposes an educational program for both out group migrant minorities, and in group majorities. The material focuses on advising members to adhere to their own nationalistic heritage, as well as become informed about another groups identities. Thus maintaining a healthy sense of respect and acknowledgment of each groups selfhood.
A similar process is proposed by Mary Frances O’Connor in her novel grief model. That being, this partner will always be here for me and I will always be here for them. While also recognizing that I will never see this person again. Mary applies her model in many areas of grief.
I suggest there can be many other applications of these kinds of models. The first the be able to construct is a solid empirical context. Subjective considerations and characteristics can be applied as well. It is highly recommended in all application to start by identifying the more objective conjectures first.
I have had many kinds of domino like effects of loss in my life. A personal loss of different kinds has triggered professional losses, familial losses, social losses, lifestyle losses, and more. These can take on many arrangements. There is no particular order to any of these models.
I have used these models in terms of, “I had these conditions in my life at that time, and I have these conditions in my life now.”
It has been my experience that the more I use a framework such as this, the better and faster the resolutions take place. I think the process of developing the appropriate, different contexts is the most essential.
The resolution seems to take place in different ways. It can start in one area or another. It can result in different kinds of observations. It can have results in one area before another and vice-versa.
The most consistent thing I notice is that I become more at ease with both the contexts. And the situations in my life that these contexts occur in become easier to tolerate with less reactivity, avoidance, less negative reinforcement and less negative arousal. That last one is a funny term to me.
There are also applications to meditation and meditation like practices of reflection. Some mediation teachers today propose a combination of Vipassana and Jhana practices. Vipassana refers to noticing the characteristics of experience as a meditation. And classical characteristics are impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no self. There are endless interpretations of these things and I think it is best if you just explore your own. I don’t think it is necessary to only use the classical objects of mediation. Some teachers in classical asian settings also recognize that these are very culturally selective. I will be sharing some of my own insights in this area in the future. Jhanna refers to the concentration like aspect of meditation. I think the most basic thing to notice about this aspect of the practice is the slowing down of ones senses. That seems to be the most common basis of what people experience in Jhanna. I recommend Richard Shankman’s book “The experience of Samadhi” as an excellent exploration of the above topics.
So these two, Jhanna and Vipassana represent another pair to be able to recognize in meditation.
Similar ideas found throughout so called spiritual literature are the ideas expressed by the symbol of the Uroborus and the Mandala. The Uroborus is the symbol of the snake eating its tail. This represents another pair in itself. The head being that of singularity. I like the term for consciousness proposed by Nassim Taleb as the “winner take all,” phenomena. That is, our consciousness only has room for the most preferred area of our perception. The tail represents the wider encompassment of our peripheral attention. This is also known classically as the center, a point, and the circle, the periphery.
The mandala also embodies a pair or more often a quatrain of four aspects of a whole. This represents the wholeness of different conditions. Sometimes this can be told in creation myths where opposite aspects of creation are revealed. Sometimes developmentally in terms of chronological events.
The ability to recognized these different contexts as pairs or such, has long fascinated humans.
In my developmental story of birth in prolonged vulnerability to a socially conditioned context of control also produces a pair. The important thing to keep in mind is that neither of the aspects in more dominant over the other. The domination stories of religions and cultures represent and reinforce a more exploitative model of oppression. Humans have a long way to go in this area and that is why I often suggest that so many models are obsolete in the consideration of more comprehensive human models.
Venerability is popularly identified as weakness, susceptibility, liability, instability, weakness, frailty, peril, risk, jeopardy, danger, precariousness, feebleness, infirmity, brittleness etc. I always find it interesting how societies bias’ show up so clearly in language and how those go into programming the ways we relate to important pairs. This misrepresentation is another aspect of why humans increasingly today in terms of social conventions in all areas always pick the least effective indicators for what they are experiencing, what they want to look at, and look to for guidance. This is revealed in depth in all areas of human activity in my upcoming book.
You do not often hear of vulnerability as a positive emotion, or in reference to learning. These are enormous basic deficits to human awareness, perception, and functionality.
For me Joy and Vulnerability go hand in hand. As do being able to access new experiences directly engages vulnerability. However this is complete ignored in mainstream society.
Singular identities, group identities or group preference policies must be distinguished from whatever purely subjective identifications, preferences or prejudices may exist among individuals and groups. These subjective feelings may of course influence identities and group policies, but the primary focus here is on concrete identifications, and group/government policies and their empirical consequences—not on their rationales, hopes, or promises, though these latter considerations will not be wholly ignored. Fundamentally, however, this is a study of what actually happens, rather than a philosophical exploration of issues that have been amply—if not more than amply- explored else where. Adapted from Thomas Sowell, Affirmative Action Around the World
No comments:
Post a Comment