Time and time again I have noticed that, regardless of how the subject is explained, there are more profound aspects of what people originally think they were taught and don't understand at all. People hear things explained many times over but still don't understand.
Why is this?
If I look into it I discover a possible reason and that is most of us are familiar with everyday language; the language spoken by the everyday person; ordinary worldy language. Some fail to realise the existence of another quite different and special language, that being subconcious thought language.
The subconcious thought language is something altogether different from that language used everyday. Bear this in mind (ha!)
Most of us speak in terms of perceptions appropriate to our existence, which must? include our subconcious language and bring it into our being?
So us mere mortals, when we communicate, must base our language on physical things rather than our subconcious spirituality (No this isn't a SP forum post) accessible to ourselves. If it is based on physical, worldy matters and situations then doesn't it serve for only the tangible daily concious crappy thoughts we think we control?
We must start to gain insight into our own mental world, that being the language of the non-matrial world way above the physical.
Let me try put it another way? We distinguish ordinary physical language from metaphysical language. The field of metaphysics is utterly different from that of physics and, consequently, there is a different special metaphysical language. So in addition to the ordinary language of everyday there is a language transcends the physical.
With me so far?
The physical language is the wordly, conventional language sed under ordinary circumstances based on physical things - those that we see and experience. The metaphysical is based on mental things - such as our thoughts when on the internet!!
My point now is that if we know only everyday language, we are in no position to understand our subconcious language when we hear it liberate us with untruth on the internet.
So the ordinary people who have not seen or can interpret their subconcious language, yet work out of necessity in order to provide themselves with things and aspirations they do not have a language for therefore fail. Many kinds of high qualities must be present to meet both languages.
I have no idea about the language of moderation, because I obviously fail at both levels of everyday language and that of meeting my subconcious.
I believe I am not alone!
-M.
Originally posted by mikelomYou lost me about halfway through. But read this book:
Time and time again I have noticed that, regardless of how the subject is explained, there are more profound aspects of what people originally think they were taught and don't understand at all. People hear things explained many times over but still don't understand.
Why is this?
If I look into it I discover a possible reason and that is most of us are fam ...[text shortened]... of everyday language and that of meeting my subconcious.
I believe I am not alone!
-M.
"The Stuff of Thought" by Steven Pinker
http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/books/stuff/index.html
Highly entertaining and informative, and deals specifically with what I thought you were talking about at the beginning of your post (which ended up being something else entirely).
Originally posted by mikelomI don't think anyone presently alive on Earth can address that issue.
Time and time again I have noticed that, regardless of how the subject is explained, there are more profound aspects of what people originally think they were taught and don't understand at all. People hear things explained many times over but still don't understand.
Why is this?
If I look into it I discover a possible reason and that is most of us are fam ...[text shortened]... of everyday language and that of meeting my subconcious.
I believe I am not alone!
-M.
The subconscious is that because we can't access it directly and will remain that way for a long time to come. Maybe when brain scan technology gets strong enough to detect information flow in individual neurons and we can analyze total flows like that from billions of neurons at once we can begin to address the problem from a scientific POV. Till then we are left with a planet full of charlatans and snake oil salesmen.
Originally posted by mikelomDo you know that body language is persvasive than the actual words.
That's because you are looking within ( a good thing ) but you are not looking without. 😉
Like showing a middle finger tells that the "so called" is a a--hole!
You should avoid this type of language!
Sincerely,
Harri / Luck
Originally posted by LuckYou never saw my body nor its language. therefore, why do you make such a judgement about ME?
Do you know that body language is persvasive than the actual words.
Like showing a middle finger tells that the "so called" is a a--hole!
You should avoid this type of language!
Sincerely,
Harri / Luck
Your inference about the picture maybe correct. Look at your reaction to it! It's been there for 3 years but you never made reference to it.
Are you on a guilt trip or something? 😲
Please tell me what persvasive means as it is not in my colloquialism.
Good Harri,
-M. X
Originally posted by mikelomwell it must mean something to you or you would have changed it. Kind of reminds me of that Johnny Cash poster, you remember it?
You never saw my body nor its language. therefore, why do you make such a judgement about ME?
Your inference about the picture maybe correct. Look at your reaction to it! It's been there for 3 years but you never made reference to it.
Are you on a guilt trip or something? 😲
Please tell me what persvasive means as it is not in my colloquialism.
Good Harri,
-M. X
im at present a student of animation. Recently we had a lecture on language from a couple great animators from Pixar studios. The general concensus and there are lot of different numbers out there so i wont even bother stating numbers, is that the bulk of our communication is non verbal. Gestures, posture, eye contact, eye direction(up and to the right creating- up and to the left recalling-typically) body angles, distant between ppl, physical contact, and we havent even got into tone and how words are said. When you factor in all of these things the actual words we say, are far less significant to communicating than you would think.